lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams
Rewrites technical research content into a structured lay summary that cross-disciplinary teams can quickly understand and act on. Use when the user wants to explain research to colleagues outside their specialty — clinicians, wet-lab scientists, bioinformaticians, product managers, or leadership. Trigger on: "lay summary", "explain my research to the team", "non-technical summary", "cross-disciplinary summary", "translate my findings", "align our team on the study", or any request to communicate research goals, findings, or next steps to a mixed or non-specialist audience. Part of the AIPOCH Academic Writing skill hub. Sits midstream: after research content is clarified, before downstream deliverables like slide decks or graphical abstracts.
Best use case
lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Rewrites technical research content into a structured lay summary that cross-disciplinary teams can quickly understand and act on. Use when the user wants to explain research to colleagues outside their specialty — clinicians, wet-lab scientists, bioinformaticians, product managers, or leadership. Trigger on: "lay summary", "explain my research to the team", "non-technical summary", "cross-disciplinary summary", "translate my findings", "align our team on the study", or any request to communicate research goals, findings, or next steps to a mixed or non-specialist audience. Part of the AIPOCH Academic Writing skill hub. Sits midstream: after research content is clarified, before downstream deliverables like slide decks or graphical abstracts.
Teams using lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams 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/lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams Compares
| Feature / Agent | lay-summary-for-cross-disciplinary-teams | 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?
Rewrites technical research content into a structured lay summary that cross-disciplinary teams can quickly understand and act on. Use when the user wants to explain research to colleagues outside their specialty — clinicians, wet-lab scientists, bioinformaticians, product managers, or leadership. Trigger on: "lay summary", "explain my research to the team", "non-technical summary", "cross-disciplinary summary", "translate my findings", "align our team on the study", or any request to communicate research goals, findings, or next steps to a mixed or non-specialist audience. Part of the AIPOCH Academic Writing skill hub. Sits midstream: after research content is clarified, before downstream deliverables like slide decks or graphical abstracts.
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
> **Source**: [https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills](https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills)
# Lay Summary for Cross-Disciplinary Teams
Converts technical research into a structured summary that clinical, wet-lab,
bioinformatics, product, and management teams can rapidly read and act on.
## Position in the Research Pipeline
This skill sits **midstream**:
- **Upstream** (should exist first): Clear research question, defined objectives,
structured results, result narrative
- **This skill**: Translates that clarified content for non-specialist readers
- **Downstream** (natural next steps): Slide Deck for Lab Meeting, Graphical
Abstract Generator, Reviewer Response Drafter
If the user's research content is still vague or unstructured, prompt them to
clarify objectives and key findings first. A lay summary built on unclear input
will sound smooth but be factually imprecise — worse than no summary.
---
## Step 1 — Gather Input
Ask the user to provide any of:
- Abstract, introduction, or results section
- Key findings in their own words
- A study summary or internal report
Also ask: **Who is the primary audience?**
- `mixed` (default) — all teams listed
- `clinical` — clinicians, medical staff
- `wet-lab` — bench scientists, experimentalists
- `bioinformatics` — computational scientists, data analysts
- `product` — product managers, translational teams
- `management` — leadership, funders, executives
If unspecified, use `mixed` and include all relevant audience bullets.
---
## Step 2 — Extract Core Structure
Before writing, internally map the input to these five elements:
| Element | What to find |
|---|---|
| **Study goal** | Why was this done? What problem does it address? |
| **System / population** | What was studied? (patients, cells, datasets, samples…) |
| **Main finding** | What did the data show? Be specific — avoid vague positives. |
| **Evidence boundary** | What can this support? What remains uncertain or untested? |
| **Next action** | What should each team know or do because of this? |
If any element is missing from the input, note it in the output and invite the
user to fill in the gap.
---
## Step 3 — Write the Lay Summary
Use the output template in `assets/output-template.md`.
Writing principles:
- No unexplained acronyms — define on first use or remove
- Evidence boundary must be explicit: distinguish finding from interpretation
- Each audience bullet should be actionable, not just descriptive
- Quantify findings where possible ("3-fold higher", "in 4 of 6 subtypes")
- The summary must stand alone without access to the original paper
For audience-specific language guidance, read `references/audience-guide.md`.
---
## Step 4 — Quality Check
Before delivering output, verify:
- [ ] No naked jargon or undefined acronyms
- [ ] Finding is accurate — not overstated, not undersold
- [ ] Evidence boundary is clearly hedged
- [ ] Each audience bullet is actionable
- [ ] Summary reads cleanly to someone with no domain knowledge
If a check fails, revise before presenting.
---
## References
- `assets/output-template.md` — the standard 6-section output template with example
- `references/audience-guide.md` — language and framing guidance per audience typeRelated Skills
scientific-podcast-summary
Automatically summarize scientific podcasts like Huberman Lab and Nature.
crossref-database
Access CrossRef metadata for scholarly works; use when you need to resolve a DOI or search CrossRef to retrieve bibliographic details, citation/reference counts, or funder information for research and citation management.
cross-disciplinary-bridge-finder
Use when identifying collaboration opportunities across fields, finding experts in complementary disciplines, translating methodologies between scientific domains, or building interdisciplinary research teams. Identifies synergies between scientific disciplines, matches researchers with complementary expertise, and facilitates cross-domain collaborations. Supports interdisciplinary grant applications and innovative research team formation.
lay-summary-gen
Converts complex medical abstracts into plain language summaries for.
discharge-summary-writer
Generate hospital discharge summaries from admission data, hospital course.
cross-disease-shared-biomarker-network
Generates complete cross-disease shared-biomarker bioinformatics research designs from a user-provided disease pair and validation direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a multi-dataset study linking two related diseases through shared DEGs, enrichment, PPI hub genes, public validation, regulatory-network analysis, immune infiltration, drug-gene interaction screening, and optional qRT-PCR or cell-line validation. Covers five study patterns (shared-DEG discovery, hub-gene prioritization, regulatory-network interpretation, immune/drug follow-up, bioinformatics-plus-validation) and always outputs four workload configs (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and a strictly verified reference literature retrieval layer with real references only.
consistency-checker-across-manuscript
Checks consistency across title, abstract, methods, results, figures, tables, and supplements to identify internal contradictions and version drift in biomedical manuscripts.
skill-auditor
A comprehensive auditor for any agent skill — including Manus, OpenClaw/ClawHub, Claude, LobeHub, or custom SKILL.md-based skills. Use this skill whenever a user wants to evaluate, audit, review, score, or quality-check an agent skill before publishing, updating, or deploying. Covers two hard veto gates (structural redlines + research integrity redlines), static quality scoring across 25 criteria (ISO 25010 + OpenSSF + Agent), dynamic test input generation, multi-mode execution testing, multi-layer output evaluation with five specialized category rubrics (Evidence Insight / Protocol Design / Data Analysis / Academic Writing / Other), a Research Veto that applies to all four research categories, human eval viewer generation, actionable P0/P1/P2 optimization recommendations, and automatic skill improvement that outputs a polished, production-ready SKILL.md. Also use whenever a user says "audit my skill", "evaluate my skill", "improve my skill", or wants a corrected version after evaluation.
two-sample-mr-research-planner
Generates complete two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) research designs from a user-provided research direction. Use when users want to design, plan, or build a study using two-sample MR to test causal relationships. Triggers:"design a two-sample MR study", "build a publishable MR paper", "test whether this biomarker causally affects this disease", "generate Lite/Standard/Advanced MR plans", "screen multiple exposures with MR", "bidirectional MR design", "causal inference using GWAS summary statistics", or "I want to study X and Y using MR". Always outputs four workload configurations (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with a recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, and publication upgrade path.
research-proposal-generator
Generates a comprehensive research proposal design based on input literature, including hypothesis, mechanism verification, and budget. Use when the user wants to design a research project from a paper.
research-grants
Write competitive research proposals for NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, and Taiwan's NSTC when you need agency-compliant narratives, budgets, and review-criteria alignment for a specific solicitation/FOA/BAA.
protocol-standardization
Standardize fragmented experimental steps into reproducible protocol documents when you need method organization, lab SOP drafting, or cross-operator reproducibility; missing parameters must be explicitly marked as "To be supplemented/Not provided".