본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

academic-highlight-generator

Generates submission-ready Elsevier/SCI Highlights from manuscript text or extracted PDF/DOCX/TXT content. Use when a user needs 3-5 concise, evidence-grounded highlight bullets for a research paper, review, meta-analysis, case report, or bioinformatics manuscript.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

연동 도구Word
설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(4)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB
  • academic-highlight-generator_audit_result_v1.json11.9 KB
  • references/prompts.md3.8 KB
  • scripts/extract_text.py2.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Source: https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills

Academic Highlight Generator

Generate journal-ready Highlights that can be pasted directly into a submission system. This skill is for academic writing output, not for inventing missing results.

When to Use

  • The user wants a Highlights section for a manuscript submission.
  • The source is an English manuscript, abstract, results summary, or extracted full text.
  • The paper falls into one of these types: Original Research, Meta-analysis, Review, Case Report, Bioinformatics, Bibliometrics, or Technical Note.
  • The user needs a deterministic, concise output with strict bullet-count and length limits.

When Not to Use

  • The user asks you to fabricate results, novelty claims, study counts, effect sizes, or conclusions that are not in the source.
  • The source text is too short to identify study type or key findings reliably.
  • The document is a perspective, commentary, editorial, or otherwise unsuitable for formal submission highlights.
  • The user provides a binary .doc file. This package supports .txt, .pdf, and .docx; convert .doc before continuing.

Required Inputs

Provide one of the following:

  • Plain manuscript text, abstract, or structured study summary.
  • A supported source file path for scripts/extract_text.py: .txt, .pdf, or .docx.

Recommended metadata if available:

  • Manuscript type or target journal.
  • Core method, main findings, and significance sentence.
  • Any wording constraints such as British/American spelling.

Output Contract

Always return:

Highlights
- <bullet 1>
- <bullet 2>
- <bullet 3>
[- <bullet 4>]
[- <bullet 5>]

Hard requirements:

  • Exactly 3-5 bullets.
  • English bullets only unless the user explicitly requests Chinese.
  • Maximum 85 characters per English bullet.
  • Objective third-person tone.
  • No first person (we, our).
  • No undefined abbreviations, citation markers, or figure/table references.
  • Every bullet must be grounded in source material.

Supported Execution Paths

Path A: Source text already provided

Use the provided text directly. This is the preferred path for speed and determinism.

Path B: Source file needs extraction

Use:

python scripts/extract_text.py <file_path>

Supported formats:

  • .txt
  • .pdf
  • .docx

Unsupported format:

  • .doc -> ask the user to convert to .docx or .pdf first.

Workflow

1. Validate source sufficiency

Before writing anything, confirm the source contains enough signal to identify:

  • study type
  • method or evidence base
  • main finding or conclusion

If not, stop and use the refusal template in ## Fallback and Refusal Contract.

2. Extract text if needed

If the user provided a file instead of text, run:

python scripts/extract_text.py <file_path>

If extraction fails:

  • report the exact failure,
  • preserve the original file path in the message,
  • do not invent content from the missing file.

3. Detect article type

Use references/prompts.md to classify the manuscript into one of:

  • Original Research
  • Meta-analysis
  • Review
  • Case Report / Case Series
  • Bioinformatics Study
  • Perspective / Commentary
  • Education / Policy Research
  • Bibliometric Analysis
  • Short Communication / Technical Note
  • Other / Unclear

4. Generate draft highlights

Select the matching generation prompt from references/prompts.md.

Coverage priorities by type:

  • Original Research: method, main result, mechanism/utility, significance
  • Meta-analysis / Review: evidence base, synthesis method, conclusion, gap/future direction
  • Case Report: case feature, diagnostic or treatment learning point, follow-up significance
  • Bioinformatics: data source, analytic method, marker/pathway/model, biological relevance
  • Bibliometrics: database, time span, tools, hotspots/trends, collaboration pattern
  • Technical Note: method/device/process optimization, efficiency or usability gain

5. Self-critique and refine

Use the critique and refinement prompts in references/prompts.md.

The final output must satisfy all of these checks:

  • 3-5 bullets
  • no bullet exceeds the limit
  • the bullets are not copied verbatim from the abstract
  • the set covers method + finding + value at least once
  • no fabricated numbers or study claims

Fallback and Refusal Contract

If the source is unsuitable or insufficient, respond with this structure:

Cannot generate submission-ready Highlights yet.
Reason: <insufficient source / unsupported article type / unsupported file format>
Detected type: <type or Unknown>
Minimum additional input needed:
- <item 1>
- <item 2>

Use this refusal contract when:

  • the article type is Other / Unclear,
  • the text is too short to ground claims,
  • the user asks for invention rather than extraction,
  • the file format is unsupported.

Deterministic Rules

  • Keep the same output header every time: Highlights.
  • Do not switch between sentence fragments and full sentences in one output.
  • Prefer one factual claim per bullet.
  • If a key value is unavailable, omit that value instead of guessing it.
  • If the source supports only three safe bullets, output three rather than padding to five.

Quality Checklist

Before returning the final answer, verify:

  • Study type and bullet focus are aligned.
  • No unsupported causal overstatement appears.
  • No clinical recommendation is implied unless the source itself states one cautiously.
  • Each bullet is independently readable.
  • The final output can be pasted into a journal submission form without reformatting.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Transform lengthy academic papers into concise, structured 250-word abstracts.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

Precision editing tool that reduces abstract word count through intelligent compression techniques, maintaining scientific rigor while meeting strict journal and conference requirements.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

Refines long medical academic texts into SCI-style unstructured Chinese and English abstracts; use when you need to condense drafts/reports/summaries into bilingual abstracts and generate Summary_Report.md.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

Generates complete FAERS pharmacovigilance study designs for multi-drug or class-level safety comparison inside one predefined SOC or AE family using active comparators, disproportionality analysis, subgroup characterization, and reviewer-facing evidence control.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

Analyze data with `adme-property-predictor` using a reproducible workflow, explicit validation, and structured outputs for review-ready interpretation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

Generates CIOMS I-compliant ICSR narratives from adverse event case data for FDA and EMA regulatory submission. Includes temporal analysis, MedDRA coding, causality assessment using WHO-UMC or Naranjo criteria, and multi-format output.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

aipoch/medical-research-skills2천2026년 9월 17일 업데이트

aipoch의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고