systematic-review
Conduct comprehensive literature searches, quality assessments, evidence synthesis, and meta-analyses
Best use case
systematic-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Conduct comprehensive literature searches, quality assessments, evidence synthesis, and meta-analyses
Teams using systematic-review should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/systematic-review/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How systematic-review Compares
| Feature / Agent | systematic-review | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Conduct comprehensive literature searches, quality assessments, evidence synthesis, and meta-analyses
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
SKILL.md Source
# Systematic Review Skill Conduct comprehensive literature searches, quality assessments, and evidence synthesis including meta-analysis. ## Overview The Systematic Review skill enables conducting comprehensive literature searches, quality assessments, evidence synthesis, and meta-analyses following established protocols for rigorous evidence-based research and policy making. ## Capabilities ### Search Strategy - Database selection - Search term development - Boolean operators - Citation tracking - Grey literature inclusion ### Study Selection - Inclusion/exclusion criteria - Screening procedures - Dual review process - Disagreement resolution - PRISMA documentation ### Quality Assessment - Risk of bias tools - Quality checklists - Evidence grading - Study appraisal - Bias identification ### Evidence Synthesis - Narrative synthesis - Vote counting - Framework synthesis - Thematic synthesis - Realist synthesis ### Meta-Analysis - Effect size calculation - Heterogeneity assessment - Fixed/random effects - Publication bias - Sensitivity analysis ## Usage Guidelines ### When to Use - Synthesizing evidence - Informing policy - Identifying research gaps - Establishing consensus - Supporting decisions ### Best Practices - Register protocol - Document thoroughly - Use multiple reviewers - Assess bias - Update regularly ### Integration Points - Quantitative Methods skill - Qualitative Analysis skill - Policy Communication skill - Academic Writing and Publication skill ## References - Literature Review and Synthesis process - Policy Impact Assessment process - Policy Research Analyst agent - Mixed Methods Research Coordinator agent
Related Skills
quality-assurance-review
Conduct systematic quality reviews of instructional materials using established rubrics (Quality Matters) and design standards
peer-review-simulator
Skill for simulating peer review feedback on manuscripts
dfm-review
Skill for design for manufacturing review and optimization
design-review
Skill for formal design review preparation and execution (PDR/CDR)
design-review-facilitator
Design review planning and execution skill for structured design phase gate reviews per 21 CFR 820.30
clinical-literature-reviewer
Systematic literature review skill for clinical evaluation supporting regulatory submissions
performance-review
Generate performance review documentation and facilitate evaluation processes
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions. Requires technical rigor and verification, not blind implementation.
systematic-debugging
Structured debugging methodology using hypothesis-driven investigation, log analysis, and bisection to isolate and resolve defects.
security-review
Security vulnerability assessment identifying OWASP risks, injection vectors, authentication issues, and data exposure with severity classification.
plan-review-gate
Adversarial plan review by 3 independent reviewers (Feasibility, Completeness, Scope & Alignment) before presenting to user.