跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

systematic-review

Plan and carry out a systematic review using PRISMA 2020, a reporting guideline for evidence reviews. Organize database searches, study screening, data extraction, quality assessment, meta-analysis, and final review reporting.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping revi...

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Planning a systematic review or meta-analysis
  • Searching and screening studies across databases
  • Extracting study details and assessing bias
  • Synthesizing results and preparing PRISMA reporting

包含的文件(3)

  • SKILL.md6.6 KB
  • eval_report_systematic-review_result.json8.4 KB
  • POLISH_CHANGELOG.md591 B

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

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

Systematic Review (Meta Skill)

This meta-skill coordinates a complete systematic review pipeline following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. It integrates multi-database literature searching, structured screening, information extraction, quantitative synthesis, and standardized reporting into a rigorous evidence review workflow by combining three specialized skills.

Workflow

Step 1: Protocol Development

Define the review protocol before conducting any searches:

  • Formulate the research question using the PICO framework (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome)
  • Establish inclusion and exclusion criteria with explicit justification
  • Define the search strategy: databases, date range, language restrictions
  • Specify outcome measures and effect size metrics
  • Pre-register the protocol (PROSPERO or OSF recommended)
  • Document any planned sensitivity or subgroup analyses

Step 2: Multi-Database Systematic Search

Execute comprehensive searches across multiple bibliographic databases:

  • PubMed/MEDLINE: Biomedical and clinical literature via structured MeSH queries
  • arXiv: Preprints in quantitative and computational fields
  • Semantic Scholar: AI-augmented citation graph and full-text search
  • CrossRef: DOI-based metadata and cross-publisher discovery
  • Construct database-specific search strings from the master strategy
  • Document exact queries, dates, result counts; deduplicate exports
  • Supplement with citation chaining (forward and backward) on key papers

Step 3: Screening and Eligibility Assessment

Apply a two-stage screening process to identify eligible studies:

  • Title/abstract screening: Apply inclusion criteria, flag uncertain cases
  • Full-text assessment: Evaluate against all criteria, document exclusion reasons
  • Track inter-rater agreement (Cohen's kappa) if multiple reviewers
  • Maintain a log of all screening decisions for the PRISMA flow diagram
  • Resolve disagreements through discussion or third-reviewer arbitration

Step 4: Structured Data Extraction

Extract pre-defined data elements from each included study:

  • Study characteristics: design, setting, sample size, follow-up duration
  • Population, intervention, comparator: demographics, dosage, duration
  • Outcomes and results: endpoints, effect estimates, confidence intervals
  • Quality indicators: randomization method, blinding, attrition, funding

Use ScienceClaw information extraction to assist with structured data capture from PDF full texts, reducing manual effort and transcription errors.

Step 5: Risk of Bias and Quality Assessment

Evaluate methodological quality of each included study:

  • Apply appropriate tools (RoB 2 for RCTs, ROBINS-I for non-randomized, Newcastle-Ottawa)
  • Assess each domain: selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting
  • Generate risk-of-bias summary figures (traffic light plots)
  • Evaluate overall certainty of evidence using GRADE framework
  • Document judgments with supporting quotations from study texts

Step 6: Meta-Analysis and Evidence Synthesis

Perform quantitative synthesis when studies are sufficiently homogeneous:

  • Calculate standardized effect sizes (SMD, OR, RR, HR as appropriate)
  • Fit random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analysis models
  • Generate forest plots with study-level and pooled estimates
  • Assess heterogeneity: I-squared statistic, Cochran's Q test, tau-squared
  • Subgroup and sensitivity analyses: leave-one-out, trim-and-fill, funnel plots

Step 7: PRISMA Reporting and Final Output

Compile the review following PRISMA 2020 reporting standards:

  • PRISMA flow diagram with identification, screening, eligibility, inclusion counts
  • Characteristics of included studies table
  • Risk-of-bias summary and individual study assessments
  • Forest plots, funnel plots, and subgroup analysis figures
  • Summary of findings table with GRADE certainty ratings
  • Complete PRISMA 2020 checklist (Page et al., BMJ 2021;372:n71) cross-referenced to report sections

Integration Points

  • literature-search -- Multi-database querying, deduplication, citation chaining, export
  • scienceclaw-ie -- Structured data extraction from PDFs, entity recognition, table parsing
  • paper-writing -- PRISMA-compliant report generation, figure formatting, reference management

Output Formats

  • PRISMA flow diagram: Study counts at each screening stage with exclusion reasons
  • Study characteristics table: Design, population, intervention, outcomes per study
  • Forest plot: Effect sizes with CIs, weights, pooled estimate, heterogeneity stats
  • Risk-of-bias table: Domain-level judgments per study with traffic light visualization
  • Summary of findings: GRADE-rated evidence table for each outcome
  • Full report: PRISMA 2020 compliant manuscript with all required sections

PRISMA 2020 Checklist Reference

This workflow aligns with the PRISMA 2020 statement (Page et al., BMJ 2021;372:n71). The 27-item checklist spans title through other information, and each workflow step maps to specific checklist items to ensure completeness.

Best Practices

  1. Register the protocol before beginning searches to reduce reporting bias
  2. Use at least two independent reviewers for screening and extraction
  3. Document every decision point for full transparency and reproducibility
  4. Never modify inclusion criteria after seeing search results without justification
  5. Report all pre-planned analyses regardless of statistical significance
  6. Use GRADE to rate certainty of evidence for each outcome separately
  7. Clearly distinguish direct evidence from indirect comparisons
  8. Acknowledge limitations in study-level quality and review-level methodology
  9. Update the review when substantial new evidence becomes available
  10. Make extracted data and analysis code publicly available when possible

Input Validation

This skill accepts requests that match the documented purpose of systematic-review and include enough context to complete the workflow safely.

Do not continue the workflow when the request is out of scope, missing a critical input, or would require unsupported assumptions. Instead respond:

systematic-review only handles its documented workflow. Please provide the missing required inputs or switch to a more suitable skill.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Condense an academic paper into a structured abstract of up to 250 words, organized by background, objective, methods, results, and conclusion. It aims to retain key quantitative findings and supports papers from several research fields; figures and charts are not interpreted.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Creating a concise abstract from a research paper
  • Summarizing empirical studies while retaining key statistics
  • Preparing structured summaries across multiple papers
aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

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

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

Predicts absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion properties for small molecules from their structures. Use the results to compare compounds, screen libraries, and review drug-likeness scores in structured outputs. Predictions support prioritization and need experimental validation.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Compare predicted ADME profiles for small-molecule candidates
  • Screen a compound library for drug-likeness
  • Rank candidates against target property ranges
aipoch/medical-research-skills19802026年9月17日 更新

查看 aipoch 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题