Menú
Use when conducting a literature synthesis — systematic review, narrative review, scoping review, or meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
Use when writing academic prose for qualitative research — findings, methods, discussion sections with appropriate voice and conventions.
Use when conducting participatory action research (PAR) involving collaborative inquiry, cycles of action and reflection.
Use when formatting academic work in APA 7th edition style — citations, references, headings, tables, and manuscript structure.
Use when designing or conducting case study research following Yin's multiple case study methodology or Stake's approach.
Use when developing and densifying categories with properties, dimensions, conditions, and consequences.
Use when formatting academic work in Chicago/Turabian style — notes-bibliography or author-date systems.
| name | literature-synthesis |
| description | Use when conducting a literature synthesis — systematic review, narrative review, scoping review, or meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. |
Synthesis means more than summarizing articles: you compare, contrast, integrate, and evaluate patterns across a body of work to produce new insight—whether that is a gap map, a theory critique, or a higher-order interpretive synthesis.
Translate your question into PICOS-like elements adapted for qualitative work (population, phenomenon, context). Use controlled vocabulary + free-text; document databases, date limits, language limits, and grey literature sources. Save reproducible search strings.
PRISMA flow diagrams and checklists target systematic reviews broadly. For qualitative systematic reviews, use extensions/guidance where available (e.g., ENTREQ reporting guidance for qualitative evidence syntheses—verify current preferred reporting standards for your discipline).
Meta-ethnography (Noblit & Hare):
Sandelowski & Barroso’s meta-summary (quantitative-leaning facet):
Choose a method that matches your epistemology (interpretive vs aggregative).
Build a matrix: rows as studies; columns as constructs, contexts, methods, findings, limitations. Color-code agreements, tensions, silences. Matrices reveal contradictions worth theorizing.
Structure by themes or analytic constructs, not by “Article A, Article B.” For each theme:
Distinguish empirical gaps (no studies in context X) from theoretical gaps (unexplained mechanisms) from method gaps (weak designs dominating a topic).
Classic GT delays substantive-area literature until later analytic stages. A standalone literature synthesis skill is for literature-first projects (reviews, proposals) or post-emergence integration—do not use it to smuggle forcing into early GT coding.
