research-synthesis
Medical literature synthesis, evidence grading, systematic review methodology, and clinical research interpretation
来源信息
- 仓库
- aizech/halo-core
- 最近来源活动
- 2026年3月28日 22:09
- 检测到的 SKILL.md 语言
- 英语
- 星标
- 2
- 分支
- 1
安装方式
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt;你也可以切换为直接命令,或下载本地副本。
检查来源文件
决定是否安装前,请先阅读 SKILL.md,以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
文件资源管理器
2 个文件正在显示 SKILL.md
SKILL.md
来源说明 · 只读预览- name
- research-synthesis
- description
- Medical literature synthesis, evidence grading, systematic review methodology, and clinical research interpretation
- metadata
- {"version":"1.0.0","author":"HALO Core","tags":["medical","research","evidence-synthesis","literature-review"]}
# Research Synthesis Skill
Use this skill when conducting literature reviews, synthesizing medical research, or evaluating clinical evidence.
## When to Use
- Systematic literature searches
- Evidence synthesis for clinical questions
- Quality assessment of studies
- Writing literature reviews
- Translating research to clinical practice
## Research Synthesis Framework
### 1. Question Formulation (PICO)
Structure the clinical question:
- **P**opulation: Who is the patient/population?
- **I**ntervention: What is the exposure/treatment?
- **C**omparison: What is the alternative?
- **O**utcome: What outcomes are important?
### 2. Search Strategy
- Define search terms
- Select databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Embase)
- Include/exclude criteria
- Document the search process
### 3. Study Evaluation
Assess each study for:
- Study design
- Sample size
- Follow-up duration
- Bias risk
- Funding sources
### 4. Evidence Synthesis
Combine findings:
- Forest plots when appropriate
- Heterogeneity assessment
- Sensitivity analyses
- Subgroup analyses
### 5. Grading
Rate evidence quality:
```
GRADE System:
- High: Further research unlikely to change confidence
- Moderate: Further research may change confidence
- Low: Further research likely to change confidence
- Very Low: Any estimate is very uncertain
```
## Evidence Hierarchy
| Level | Quality | Type |
|-------|---------|------|
| 1a | High | Systematic review of RCTs |
| 1b | High | Individual RCT with narrow CI |
| 2a | Moderate | Systematic review of cohort |
| 2b | Moderate | Individual cohort study |
| 3a | Low | Systematic review of case-control |
| 3b | Low | Individual case-control |
| 4 | Very Low | Case series |
| 5 | Very Low | Expert opinion |
## Critical Appraisal
### RCTs (CONSORT)
- Randomization method
- Allocation concealment
- Blinding
- Follow-up
- ITT analysis
### Observational (STROBE)
- Selection bias
- Confounding
- Exposure measurement
- Outcome assessment
- Follow-up adequacy
### Systematic Reviews (PRISMA)
- Search methodology
- Study selection
- Quality assessment
- Synthesis method
## Output Structure
```
Literature Summary:
Clinical Question: [PICO]
Search Results:
- Databases searched
- Studies identified
- Studies included
Evidence Summary:
[Study 1]: Design, n, results, quality
[Study 2]: Design, n, results, quality
Synthesis:
- Overall effect estimate
- Heterogeneity (I²)
- Publication bias
Recommendations:
- Strength of recommendation
- Clinical applicability
- Research gaps
```
## Reporting Standards
- CONSORT: Randomized trials
- STROBE: Observational studies
- PRISMA: Systematic reviews
- MOOSE: Meta-analyses of observational
- CARE: Case reports
## Best Practices
- Pre-register protocols
- Document search strategy
- Include flow diagrams
- Rate evidence quality
- Acknowledge limitations
- Provide clinical context
- Cite properly (PMID, DOI)
在 GitHub 查看