pubmed-topic-recommend
Generate ~5 actionable research topic recommendations by querying PubMed E-utilities; use when a user provides a research direction/constraints and needs evidence-backed topic ideas quickly.
Best use case
pubmed-topic-recommend is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Generate ~5 actionable research topic recommendations by querying PubMed E-utilities; use when a user provides a research direction/constraints and needs evidence-backed topic ideas quickly.
Teams using pubmed-topic-recommend 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/pubmed-topic-recommend/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How pubmed-topic-recommend Compares
| Feature / Agent | pubmed-topic-recommend | 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?
Generate ~5 actionable research topic recommendations by querying PubMed E-utilities; use when a user provides a research direction/constraints and needs evidence-backed topic ideas quickly.
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)
## When to Use
- You have a broad research direction (e.g., "immunotherapy biomarkers") and need **5 concrete, literature-grounded topic options** to choose from.
- You need **research direction suggestions** after a quick PubMed scan, with each suggestion tied to recent papers.
- You want **topic selection based on PubMed literature** under constraints (time range, publication type, population, method preference).
- You must propose **actionable topics with a clear gap/opportunity statement**, supported by at least 1-2 cited articles.
- You need to iteratively refine a PubMed query (keywords/MeSH, inclusion/exclusion terms) until results are sufficient for topic generation.
## Key Features
- Uses the **official PubMed E-utilities** interface for literature retrieval.
- Builds PubMed queries with:
- keyword groups (`OR`) and exclusions (`NOT`)
- field restrictions (e.g., Title/Abstract) and/or MeSH terms
- date bounds via `mindate` / `maxdate`
- optional publication-type constraints (e.g., review, meta-analysis, clinical trial)
- Produces **JSON output** containing:
- the final search query
- retrieved literature metadata
- ~5 topic recommendations, each with a title, justification, and supporting citations
- Encourages evidence-consistent topic generation:
- avoids drifting beyond retrieved themes
- reduces redundancy across topics
- includes a one-sentence "gap/opportunity" per topic
## Dependencies
- Python 3.10+ (recommended)
- PubMed E-utilities (NCBI) HTTP API (no local installation required)
## Example Usage
1) Configure parameters at the top of:
- `scripts/run_topic_recommendation.py`
Typical configuration items to set (names may vary by implementation):
- keywords / MeSH terms (prefer English)
- exclusion terms
- time range (`mindate`, `maxdate`)
- publication types (optional)
- desired number of topics (default: ~5)
2) Run:
```bash
python scripts/run_topic_recommendation.py
```
3) Output:
- A JSON file or JSON printed to stdout (implementation-dependent), containing:
- `query`: the PubMed query string used
- `papers`: a list of retrieved records (titles/years/etc.)
- `topics`: ~5 topic suggestions with justification and supporting literature (at least 1-2 cited titles/years each)
## Implementation Details
- **Input collection (recommended fields)**
- Research direction / subject area (prefer English keywords; if provided in Chinese, convert to English keywords or MeSH to reduce retrieval bias)
- Topic goals/constraints (innovation vs. application, method preference, target population)
- Inclusion keywords and exclusion terms (support multiple `OR` groups and `NOT` groups)
- Time range and article types (e.g., review, meta-analysis, clinical trial)
- Optional journal/subject preferences
- Output count (default: 5)
- **Query construction**
- Combine synonyms with `OR`, apply exclusions with `NOT`.
- Use field tags (e.g., Title/Abstract) and/or MeSH terms to control precision.
- Use `mindate` / `maxdate` to constrain publication dates.
- Add publication-type filters when needed.
- If results are too few: broaden date range, relax field restrictions, or add synonyms.
- **Retrieval**
- Uses PubMed E-utilities; API and query syntax reference: `references/pubmed_api.md`.
- **Topic generation rules**
- Topics must align with retrieved literature themes (evidence-consistent).
- Avoid near-duplicate topics; cover distinct sub-directions or methodological paths.
- Each topic includes:
- a clear title
- a justification grounded in retrieved papers
- at least 1-2 supporting citations (title + year)
- a one-sentence "research gap/opportunity" statement
## When Not to Use
- Do not use this skill when the required source data, identifiers, files, or credentials are missing.
- Do not use this skill when the user asks for fabricated results, unsupported claims, or out-of-scope conclusions.
- Do not use this skill when a simpler direct answer is more appropriate than the documented workflow.
## Required Inputs
- A clearly specified task goal aligned with the documented scope.
- All required files, identifiers, parameters, or environment variables before execution.
- Any domain constraints, formatting requirements, and expected output destination if applicable.
## Recommended Workflow
1. Validate the request against the skill boundary and confirm all required inputs are present.
2. Select the documented execution path and prefer the simplest supported command or procedure.
3. Produce the expected output using the documented file format, schema, or narrative structure.
4. Run a final validation pass for completeness, consistency, and safety before returning the result.
## Deterministic Output Rules
- Use the same section order for every supported request of this skill.
- Keep output field names stable and do not rename documented keys across examples.
- If a value is unavailable, emit an explicit placeholder instead of omitting the field.
## Output Contract
- Return a structured deliverable that is directly usable without reformatting.
- If a file is produced, prefer a deterministic output name such as `pubmed_topic_recommend_result.md` unless the skill documentation defines a better convention.
- Include a short validation summary describing what was checked, what assumptions were made, and any remaining limitations.
## Validation and Safety Rules
- Validate required inputs before execution and stop early when mandatory fields or files are missing.
- Do not fabricate measurements, references, findings, or conclusions that are not supported by the provided source material.
- Emit a clear warning when credentials, privacy constraints, safety boundaries, or unsupported requests affect the result.
- Keep the output safe, reproducible, and within the documented scope at all times.
## Failure Handling
- If validation fails, explain the exact missing field, file, or parameter and show the minimum fix required.
- If an external dependency or script fails, surface the command path, likely cause, and the next recovery step.
- If partial output is returned, label it clearly and identify which checks could not be completed.
## Completion Checklist
- Confirm all required inputs were present and valid.
- Confirm the supported execution path completed without unresolved errors.
- Confirm the final deliverable matches the documented format exactly.
- Confirm assumptions, limitations, and warnings are surfaced explicitly.
## Quick Validation
Run this minimal verification path before full execution when possible:
```bash
python scripts/run_topic_recommendation.py --help
```
Expected output format:
```text
Result file: pubmed_topic_recommend_result.md
Validation summary: PASS/FAIL with brief notes
Assumptions: explicit list if any
```
## Scope Reminder
- Core purpose: Generate ~5 actionable research topic recommendations by querying PubMed E-utilities; use when a user provides a research direction/constraints and needs evidence-backed topic ideas quickly.Related Skills
search-pubmed
An intelligent tool for precision medical literature search using PubMed's E-utilities API.
journal-recommender
Recommend academic journals based on manuscript topic, abstract, and impact factor expectations. Use when the user wants to find suitable journals for their research manuscript, especially when they provide a topic, abstract, and target Impact Factor.
expert-interview-topics
Generates professional interview titles and questions based on expert background and topic. Provides a structured workflow for interview preparation.
pubmed-search-specialist
Build complex Boolean query strings for precise PubMed/MEDLINE literature retrieval. Trigger when user needs MeSH term mapping, Boolean query construction, advanced PubMed filters, citation searching, systematic review search strategy, or clinical query optimization.
recommendation-letter-assistant
Helps faculty and mentors draft standardized recommendation letters for.
primary-plan-recommender
Compares multiple study-route options for the same biomedical research question and recommends one primary plan, while explicitly explaining why alternative routes are secondary, premature, weaker, or dependency-heavy. Always use this skill when the user already has a reasonably defined question but is unsure which main study route should anchor the project. Focus on plan comparison, route selection, dependency awareness, and primary-plan justification rather than full protocol drafting.
topic-evidence-mapper
Rapidly maps the evidence landscape around a medical topic by organizing major research streams, target populations, endpoints, methods, evidence density, and thin areas. Always use this skill when a user needs a structured evidence map of a medical topic before deeper reading, gap analysis, or study planning. Do not treat evidence mapping as formal gap identification.
medical-topic-saturation-and-whitespace-checker
Maps whether a biomedical research topic, subtopic, or study angle is truly saturated, superficially crowded, strategically occupied, or still open for differentiated entry. Use this skill when a user wants to know whether a hot medical research direction is already overworked, whether meaningful whitespace remains, whether major groups have already occupied the obvious claims, and whether the timing window is still open. Always distinguish popularity from true saturation, and distinguish cosmetic novelty from meaningful differentiating entry.
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.