probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies
Assess bias in medical prediction model studies using PROBAST tool. Use when user wants to evaluate the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper (text or PDF).
Best use case
probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Assess bias in medical prediction model studies using PROBAST tool. Use when user wants to evaluate the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper (text or PDF).
Teams using probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies 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/probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies Compares
| Feature / Agent | probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies | 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?
Assess bias in medical prediction model studies using PROBAST tool. Use when user wants to evaluate the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper (text or PDF).
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.
SKILL.md Source
> **Source**: [https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills](https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills) # PROBAST Quality Assessment This skill evaluates the risk of bias in medical prediction model studies using the PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) framework. It analyzes the full text of a paper across four domains: Participants, Predictors, Outcome, and Analysis. ## When to Use - Use this skill when you need assess bias in medical prediction model studies using probast tool. use when user wants to evaluate the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper (text or pdf) in a reproducible workflow. - Use this skill when a data analytics task needs a packaged method instead of ad-hoc freeform output. - Use this skill when the user expects a concrete deliverable, validation step, or file-based result. - Use this skill when `scripts/extract_pdf.py` is the most direct path to complete the request. - Use this skill when you need the `probast-quality-assessment for prediction model studies` package behavior rather than a generic answer. ## Key Features - Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assess bias in medical prediction model studies using PROBAST tool. Use when user wants to evaluate the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper (text or PDF). - Packaged executable path(s): `scripts/extract_pdf.py`. - Reference material available in `references/` for task-specific guidance. - Structured execution path designed to keep outputs consistent and reviewable. ## Dependencies - `Python`: `3.10+`. Repository baseline for current packaged skills. - `Third-party packages`: `not explicitly version-pinned in this skill package`. Add pinned versions if this skill needs stricter environment control. ## Example Usage ```bash cd "20260316/scientific-skills/Data Analytics/probast-quality-assessment-for-prediction-model-studies" python -m py_compile scripts/extract_pdf.py python scripts/extract_pdf.py --help ``` Example run plan: 1. Confirm the user input, output path, and any required config values. 2. Edit the in-file `CONFIG` block or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings. 3. Run `python scripts/extract_pdf.py` with the validated inputs. 4. Review the generated output and return the final artifact with any assumptions called out. ## Implementation Details See `## Workflow` above for related details. - Execution model: validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable. - Input controls: confirm the source files, scope limits, output format, and acceptance criteria before running any script. - Primary implementation surface: `scripts/extract_pdf.py`. - Reference guidance: `references/` contains supporting rules, prompts, or checklists. - Parameters to clarify first: input path, output path, scope filters, thresholds, and any domain-specific constraints. - Output discipline: keep results reproducible, identify assumptions explicitly, and avoid undocumented side effects. ## Workflow To perform the assessment, follow this sequence of operations using the prompts defined in `references/probast_prompts.md`. ### Step 1: Extract Metadata Extract the first author and year from the paper. - **Prompt**: Use "1. Metadata Extraction" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. ### Step 2: Assess Risk Domains (Parallel) Assess the risk of bias for each of the four domains. For each domain, use the corresponding prompt to generate a risk rating (Low/High/Unclear) and detailed reasoning. - **Domain 1 (Participants)**: Use "2. Domain 1: Participants" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. - **Domain 2 (Predictors)**: Use "3. Domain 2: Predictors" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. - **Domain 3 (Outcome)**: Use "4. Domain 3: Outcome" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. - **Domain 4 (Analysis)**: Use "5. Domain 4: Analysis" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. ### Step 3: Determine Overall Risk Combine the risk ratings from the four domains to determine the overall risk of bias. - **Input**: The risk ratings (Low/High/Unclear) from Domains 1-4. - **Prompt**: Use "6. Overall Risk Assessment" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. ### Step 4: Format Output Generate a final JSON report containing the risk ratings for all domains and the overall assessment. - **Input**: The results from Steps 1-3. - **Prompt**: Use "7. JSON Extraction" from `references/probast_prompts.md`. - **Output Format**: A JSON object matching the `study_risk_of_bias_schema`. ## Helper Scripts ### PDF Text Extraction When the user provides a PDF file path, use `extract_pdf.py` to extract the text content before assessment:
Related Skills
rct-bias-assessment-rob2
Automates Risk of Bias 2 (ROB2) assessment for RCT papers by analyzing text against specific domains and synthesizing a report. Use when you need to assess the quality of a clinical trial paper or evaluate risk of bias.
quapas-quality-assessment-for-prognosis-studies
Evaluates bias in medical literature (prognosis studies) using QUAPAS criteria. Use when the user wants to assess the quality or risk of bias of a medical paper text.
quality-assessment
Automates critical appraisal and quality assessment for research papers by analyzing text against established methodological standards (such as risk of bias tools, quality checklists, or reporting guidelines) and synthesizing a structured evaluation report. Use when you need to assess the methodological quality, internal validity, or reporting completeness of any type of study—including RCTs, observational studies, systematic reviews, qualitative research, or diagnostic accuracy studies.
meta-forest-model-plot
Generate forest plots for meta-analysis of survival data. Input is a CSV file containing study names, HR and 95% confidence intervals, output forest plot PNG and data table CSV. Supports both R and Python scripts.
diagnostic-study-quality-assessment-quadas-2
Analyzes clinical diagnostic accuracy studies for bias using the QUADAS-2 tool. Use when Claude needs to assess the quality, risk of bias, or applicability of diagnostic accuracy studies (e.g., "Assess this paper using QUADAS-2").
cohort-study-quality-assessment-nos
Evaluates the quality of cohort studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Use when the user provides a cohort study article or text and needs a quality assessment report.
case-control-study-quality-assessment-nos
Clinical Research Bias Assessment - Case-Control Study (NOS) v2.3.0. Use when you need to assess the bias of a case-control study using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) criteria, or when evaluating the quality of a medical paper.
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".