Adapt scientific abstracts to conference-specific word limits, section rules, and formatting constraints; use when reshaping an existing abstract for submission.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
4,135 件 ・ 人気順
概要と使いどころ
Adapt scientific abstracts to conference-specific word limits, section rules, and formatting constraints; use when reshaping an existing abstract for submission.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Generate structured SOAP notes from clinical narratives, transcripts, or existing notes; use when the user needs de-identified clinical documentation organized into Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan sections, with clear assumptions and review points.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use biotech-pitch-deck-narrative for academic writing workflows that need structured investor-facing storytelling, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when drafting patient discharge summaries, creating personalized discharge instructions, simulating post-discharge outcomes, reducing hospital readmissions, or optimizing care transitions. Generates AI-enhanced discharge documentation with digital twin predictions for improved patient safety.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
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.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Precision editing tool that reduces abstract word count through intelligent compression techniques, maintaining scientific rigor while meeting strict journal and conference requirements.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use anki-card-creator for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries for study-card generation.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when determining author order on research manuscripts, assigning CRediT contributor roles for transparency, documenting individual contributions to collaborative projects, or resolving authorship disputes in multi-institutional research. Generates fair and transparent auth...
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
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.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Transform lengthy academic papers into concise, structured 250-word abstracts.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Generate interactive anatomy quizzes for medical education with multiple.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
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.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Collects candidate biomedical literature across multiple databases, adapts search logic by database, preserves source metadata, and organizes results into a structured, screening-ready candidate pool. Always use this skill when a user wants cross-database literature collection, search strategy construction, candidate paper aggregation, or first-pass evidence organization before deduplication, screening, layered reading, or review planning. Requires real and verifiable literature records only. Every formal literature item must include a real link and DOI when available; never fabricate citations, titles, authors, years, journals, abstracts, PMIDs, or DOIs. If a DOI is unavailable or cannot be verified, state that explicitly rather than inventing one.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Scans the biomarker landscape of a disease area by biomarker type, clinical/research use case, evidence layer, validation status, and maturity level. Use this skill when a user wants a field-level biomarker evidence map rather than a generic literature summary. Always separate exploratory biomarkers from externally validated or clinically embedded biomarkers, and never imply clinical maturity without explicit evidence support.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Quickly judges whether a biomedical paper is worth deep reading by screening for question fit, design quality, sample adequacy, methodological novelty, and reproducibility value.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Evidence-based medical knowledge and research mentor grounded in the Bian Que tradition. Covers clinical reasoning, diagnostic thinking (望闻问切), pharmacology, pathology, differential diagnosis, medical literature appraisal, and the philosophy of early intervention. Trigger whenever users ask about medicine, clinical science, drugs, disease mechanisms, diagnosis, lab interpretation, treatment comparison, or health sciences. Even without explicit research framing, trigger on any topic touching disease, therapeutics, or clinical decision-making. Part of the AIPOCH Medical Research Skill Hub.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Verifies whether a scientific or biomedical claim is actually supported by the cited original papers rather than by citation drift, overstatement, selective citation, or correlation-to-causation inflation. Use this skill whenever a user wants to check whether a repeated statement, slide claim, manuscript sentence, review assertion, or “people often say” scientific conclusion is truly supported by the underlying primary literature. Always separate the claim itself, the cited paper(s), what the paper actually showed, what it did not show, and whether later retellings drifted beyond the original evidence. Never fabricate references, findings, study features, or citation chains.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Systematically maps mechanism evidence for a disease from molecules to pathways, cell types, tissues, biological consequences, and clinical phenotypes. Always use this skill when a user needs a layered mechanism evidence chain rather than a flat summary or immediate gap analysis. Formal literature citations must be real and verifiable.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Reads a paper figure by figure before re-integrating the full narrative, so the user can identify the core findings quickly and check whether each visual actually supports the authors' main claims. Always separate figure content, figure-linked claim, evidentiary strength, and unsupported interpretation. Never fabricate references, PMIDs, DOIs, figure content, panel labels, result values, or study details that were not actually provided.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Identifies real, evidence-audited, topic-specific research gaps in medical research by first retrieving and verifying literature from trusted sources, then mapping the current evidence landscape, rejecting pseudo-gaps, and converting only medium/high-confidence gaps into study-ready research opportunities. Always require real literature retrieval before formal gap claims. Never fabricate references, metadata, or findings.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Detects overlooked, underrepresented, weakly resolved, or poorly validated populations and subgroups within a biomedical research area so users can identify more precise and meaningful study populations. Always use this skill when the real question is not just what is under-studied, but which populations, strata, or subgroups are missing, thinly represented, superficially analyzed, pooled without resolution, or insufficiently validated in the current evidence base. Focus on meaningful subgroup gaps rather than generic calls for diversity.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Tracks the latest preprints and emerging research topics related to your topic across bioRxiv, medRxiv, and arXiv. Use when a user wants to discover what is being published right now before it reaches journals, monitor competitor directions, spot new methodology trends, or get an early-warning scan of a research area. Triggers on phrases like "what's new in X", "latest preprints on Y", "emerging topics in Z", "monitor bioRxiv for", or "what are people working on in this field".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
A medical-research-native literature reading skill for users with clinical, bioinformatics, translational, and basic experimental backgrounds. Use this skill whenever a user wants to read, analyze, critique, or interpret a medical or scientific paper — whether they provide a PDF, abstract, DOI, PMID, or just a title. Triggers include requests like \"analyze this paper\", \"critique this study\", \"is this a strong paper?\", \"give me similar studies\", \"prepare me for journal club\", \"help me understand this bioinformatics paper\", \"what are the weaknesses here?\", or \"turn this into a mind map\". Also activate for any downstream deliverables such as journal club kits, comparison tables, PI decision briefs, replication starters, or follow-up experiment designs. Do NOT treat as a generic summarizer — this skill performs structured evidence-type classification, track-specific critical appraisal, interpretation-boundary judgment, and research-grade follow-up generation.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Writes complete, publication-grade figure legends that can stand on their own. Use when writing or revising figure legends for any scientific figure — bar charts, line graphs, scatter plots, box plots, heatmaps, survival curves, flow cytometry plots, western blots, microscopy images, or schematic diagrams. Also triggers on "write a figure legend for", "help me describe this figure", "my figure needs a legend", "write Figure 1 legend", or "what should a figure legend include".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。