systematic-review
Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping reviews. NOT for single-study analysis or narrative literature surveys.
Best use case
systematic-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping reviews. NOT for single-study analysis or narrative literature surveys.
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?
Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping reviews. NOT for single-study analysis or narrative literature surveys.
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
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
Cursor vs Codex for AI Workflows
Compare Cursor and Codex for AI coding workflows, repository assistance, debugging, refactoring, and reusable developer skills.
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
SKILL.md Source
# Systematic Review (Meta Skill) This meta-skill coordinates a complete systematic review pipeline following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. It integrates multi-database literature searching, structured screening, information extraction, quantitative synthesis, and standardized reporting into a rigorous evidence review workflow by combining three specialized skills. ## Workflow ### Step 1: Protocol Development Define the review protocol before conducting any searches: - Formulate the research question using the PICO framework (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) - Establish inclusion and exclusion criteria with explicit justification - Define the search strategy: databases, date range, language restrictions - Specify outcome measures and effect size metrics - Pre-register the protocol (PROSPERO or OSF recommended) - Document any planned sensitivity or subgroup analyses ### Step 2: Multi-Database Systematic Search Execute comprehensive searches across multiple bibliographic databases: - **PubMed/MEDLINE**: Biomedical and clinical literature via structured MeSH queries - **arXiv**: Preprints in quantitative and computational fields - **Semantic Scholar**: AI-augmented citation graph and full-text search - **CrossRef**: DOI-based metadata and cross-publisher discovery - Construct database-specific search strings from the master strategy - Document exact queries, dates, result counts; deduplicate exports - Supplement with citation chaining (forward and backward) on key papers ### Step 3: Screening and Eligibility Assessment Apply a two-stage screening process to identify eligible studies: - **Title/abstract screening**: Apply inclusion criteria, flag uncertain cases - **Full-text assessment**: Evaluate against all criteria, document exclusion reasons - Track inter-rater agreement (Cohen's kappa) if multiple reviewers - Maintain a log of all screening decisions for the PRISMA flow diagram - Resolve disagreements through discussion or third-reviewer arbitration ### Step 4: Structured Data Extraction Extract pre-defined data elements from each included study: - Study characteristics: design, setting, sample size, follow-up duration - Population, intervention, comparator: demographics, dosage, duration - Outcomes and results: endpoints, effect estimates, confidence intervals - Quality indicators: randomization method, blinding, attrition, funding Use ScienceClaw information extraction to assist with structured data capture from PDF full texts, reducing manual effort and transcription errors. ### Step 5: Risk of Bias and Quality Assessment Evaluate methodological quality of each included study: - Apply appropriate tools (RoB 2 for RCTs, ROBINS-I for non-randomized, Newcastle-Ottawa) - Assess each domain: selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting - Generate risk-of-bias summary figures (traffic light plots) - Evaluate overall certainty of evidence using GRADE framework - Document judgments with supporting quotations from study texts ### Step 6: Meta-Analysis and Evidence Synthesis Perform quantitative synthesis when studies are sufficiently homogeneous: - Calculate standardized effect sizes (SMD, OR, RR, HR as appropriate) - Fit random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analysis models - Generate forest plots with study-level and pooled estimates - Assess heterogeneity: I-squared statistic, Cochran's Q test, tau-squared - Subgroup and sensitivity analyses: leave-one-out, trim-and-fill, funnel plots ### Step 7: PRISMA Reporting and Final Output Compile the review following PRISMA 2020 reporting standards: - PRISMA flow diagram with identification, screening, eligibility, inclusion counts - Characteristics of included studies table - Risk-of-bias summary and individual study assessments - Forest plots, funnel plots, and subgroup analysis figures - Summary of findings table with GRADE certainty ratings - Complete PRISMA 2020 checklist (Page et al., BMJ 2021;372:n71) cross-referenced to report sections ## Integration Points - **literature-search** -- Multi-database querying, deduplication, citation chaining, export - **scienceclaw-ie** -- Structured data extraction from PDFs, entity recognition, table parsing - **paper-writing** -- PRISMA-compliant report generation, figure formatting, reference management ## Output Formats - **PRISMA flow diagram**: Study counts at each screening stage with exclusion reasons - **Study characteristics table**: Design, population, intervention, outcomes per study - **Forest plot**: Effect sizes with CIs, weights, pooled estimate, heterogeneity stats - **Risk-of-bias table**: Domain-level judgments per study with traffic light visualization - **Summary of findings**: GRADE-rated evidence table for each outcome - **Full report**: PRISMA 2020 compliant manuscript with all required sections ## PRISMA 2020 Checklist Reference This workflow aligns with the PRISMA 2020 statement (Page et al., BMJ 2021;372:n71). The 27-item checklist spans title through other information, and each workflow step maps to specific checklist items to ensure completeness. ## Best Practices 1. Register the protocol before beginning searches to reduce reporting bias 2. Use at least two independent reviewers for screening and extraction 3. Document every decision point for full transparency and reproducibility 4. Never modify inclusion criteria after seeing search results without justification 5. Report all pre-planned analyses regardless of statistical significance 6. Use GRADE to rate certainty of evidence for each outcome separately 7. Clearly distinguish direct evidence from indirect comparisons 8. Acknowledge limitations in study-level quality and review-level methodology 9. Update the review when substantial new evidence becomes available 10. Make extracted data and analysis code publicly available when possible
Related Skills
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
review-writing
No description provided.
peer-review
Conducts structured peer review of scientific manuscripts including methodological evaluation, statistical assessment, clarity analysis, and constructive feedback generation following journal-specific guidelines; trigger when users ask for manuscript critique, reviewer reports, or feedback on research papers.
literature-review
Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using multiple academic databases (PubMed, arXiv, bioRxiv, Semantic Scholar, etc.). This skill should be used when conducting systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses, research synthesis, or comprehensive literature searches across biomedical, scientific, and technical domains. Creates professionally formatted markdown documents and PDFs with verified citations in multiple citation styles (APA, Nature, Vancouver, etc.).
asreview-screening
Screen papers for systematic reviews using ASReview active learning. Use when: user has a large set of papers to screen for inclusion/exclusion, wants to prioritize relevant papers, or needs to reduce manual screening workload. NOT for: searching papers (use literature-search) or meta-analysis (use meta-analysis).
xurl
A CLI tool for making authenticated requests to the X (Twitter) API. Use this skill when you need to post tweets, reply, quote, search, read posts, manage followers, send DMs, upload media, or interact with any X API v2 endpoint.
xlsx
Use this skill any time a spreadsheet file is the primary input or output. This means any task where the user wants to: open, read, edit, or fix an existing .xlsx, .xlsm, .csv, or .tsv file (e.g., adding columns, computing formulas, formatting, charting, cleaning messy data); create a new spreadsheet from scratch or from other data sources; or convert between tabular file formats. Trigger especially when the user references a spreadsheet file by name or path — even casually (like "the xlsx in my downloads") — and wants something done to it or produced from it. Also trigger for cleaning or restructuring messy tabular data files (malformed rows, misplaced headers, junk data) into proper spreadsheets. The deliverable must be a spreadsheet file. Do NOT trigger when the primary deliverable is a Word document, HTML report, standalone Python script, database pipeline, or Google Sheets API integration, even if tabular data is involved.
writing
No description provided.
world-bank-data
World Bank Open Data API for development indicators. Use when: user asks about GDP, population, poverty, health, or education statistics by country. NOT for: real-time financial data or stock prices.
wikipedia-search
Search and fetch structured content from Wikipedia using the MediaWiki API for reliable, encyclopedic information
wikidata-knowledge
Query Wikidata for structured knowledge using SPARQL and entity search. Use when: (1) finding structured facts about entities (people, places, organizations), (2) querying relationships between entities, (3) cross-referencing external identifiers (Wikipedia, VIAF, GND, ORCID), (4) building knowledge graphs from linked data. NOT for: full-text article content (use Wikipedia API), scientific literature (use semantic-scholar), geospatial data (use OpenStreetMap).
weather
Get current weather and forecasts via wttr.in or Open-Meteo. Use when: user asks about weather, temperature, or forecasts for any location. NOT for: historical weather data, severe weather alerts, or detailed meteorological analysis. No API key needed.