All skills
imbad0202 avatar

/deep-research

@0d17790

Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 8 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, three-way literature scan, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, WHY HOW WHAT papers, 3W literature scan, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 三段式文獻掃描, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題, 심층 연구, 문헌 조사, 체계적 문헌고찰, 메타분석, 사실 확인, 연구 방향을 잡아줘, 연구 주제 정하는 것을 도와줘, revisión de literatura, metaanálisis

Use this Skill: https://skilld.dev/gh/imbad0202/academic-research-skills/deep-research

This session only. Nothing lands on disk.

templatesprisma_report_template.md

≈4k tokens on demand. Your agent reads this file only when SKILL.md points to it.

PRISMA 2020 — Systematic Review Report Template

Purpose

Template for writing a systematic review report following PRISMA 2020 (Page et al., 2021). All 27 PRISMA items are mapped to their corresponding sections. Use alongside references/systematic_review_toolkit.md for detailed guidance.

Reference: Page et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71


Title [PRISMA Item 1]

[Full title identifying the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both]

Example: "The Effect of [Intervention] on [Outcome] in [Population]: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"


Abstract [PRISMA Item 2]

Background

[1-2 sentences on context and why the review was done]

Objectives

[Research question(s), ideally structured as PICOS]

Data Sources

[Databases searched and dates of last search]

Study Selection

[Eligibility criteria in brief]

Data Extraction and Synthesis

[Methods used for data extraction, risk of bias, and synthesis]

Results

[Number of studies included, key findings, effect estimates with CIs, certainty of evidence]

Limitations

[Key limitations of the evidence and/or the review process]

Conclusions

[General interpretation and implications]

Registration

[Protocol registration number and repository]

Keywords: [3-5 keywords]


1. Introduction

1.1 Rationale [PRISMA Item 3]

[Describe the rationale for the review in the context of existing knowledge. Address:]

  • What is the problem or question?
  • What is already known (with references to existing reviews)?
  • Why is this review needed (e.g., no existing review, existing review outdated, conflicting evidence)?

1.2 Objectives [PRISMA Item 4]

[Provide an explicit statement of the question(s) using PICOS:]

  • Population: [target population]
  • Intervention/Exposure: [intervention or exposure of interest]
  • Comparator: [comparison group]
  • Outcome(s): [primary and secondary outcomes]
  • Study Design: [eligible study designs]

2. Methods

2.1 Eligibility Criteria [PRISMA Item 5]

Criterion Include Exclude
Study design [e.g., RCTs, quasi-experimental] [e.g., case reports, editorials]
Population [describe] [describe]
Intervention [describe] [describe]
Comparator [describe] [describe]
Outcome [describe] [describe]
Time frame [e.g., published 2014-2024] [before cutoff]
Language [e.g., English] [other]
Setting [describe] [describe]

2.2 Information Sources [PRISMA Item 6]

[List all databases and other sources searched, with dates of coverage and last search date:]

Source Date Range Last Searched
[Database 1] [start]-[end] [date]
[Database 2] [start]-[end] [date]
[Other sources: reference lists, expert contact, grey literature] — [date]

2.3 Search Strategy [PRISMA Item 7]

[Present the complete search strategy for at least one database. Include all search terms, Boolean operators, and any filters applied.]

[Database Name] Search Strategy:

#1 [search block 1 - Population terms]
#2 [search block 2 - Intervention terms]
#3 [search block 3 - Outcome terms]
#4 #1 AND #2 AND #3
#5 #4 with filters: [date, language, document type]

[Search strategies for other databases are available in Appendix A.]

2.4 Selection Process [PRISMA Item 8]

[Describe the study selection process:]

  • Number of reviewers at each stage
  • How independence was maintained
  • How disagreements were resolved
  • Software used (e.g., Covidence, Rayyan)
  • Pilot testing of screening criteria

2.5 Data Collection Process [PRISMA Item 9]

[Describe methods for extracting data from reports:]

  • Data extraction form (developed, piloted)
  • Number of extractors and independence
  • Process for resolving discrepancies
  • How missing data were handled (e.g., contacted authors)

2.6 Data Items [PRISMA Item 10]

[List all variables for which data were sought:]

Category Variables
Study-level Authors, year, country, design, setting, funding
Participants N, age, gender, diagnosis/condition, attrition
Intervention Type, duration, frequency, fidelity
Outcomes Definition, measurement tool, time points
Results Effect sizes, CIs, p-values, raw data

2.7 Study Risk of Bias Assessment [PRISMA Item 11]

[Describe the risk of bias assessment:]

  • Tool(s) used: [RoB 2 for RCTs / ROBINS-I for non-randomized / other]
  • Domains assessed
  • Number of assessors and independence
  • How results were used in the synthesis

2.8 Effect Measures [PRISMA Item 12]

[Specify the effect measure(s) for each outcome:]

Outcome Type Effect Measure Justification
[Outcome 1] Continuous SMD (Hedges' g) Different scales across studies
[Outcome 2] Binary RR Incidence data

2.9 Synthesis Methods [PRISMA Items 13a-13f]

13a. Eligibility for synthesis: [Criteria for grouping studies into each synthesis]

13b. Data preparation: [Methods to prepare data, e.g., converting SE to SD, handling multi-arm studies]

13c. Tabulation/visualization: [Methods for displaying individual study and synthesis results, e.g., forest plots, summary tables]

13d. Synthesis approach: [Statistical model and software]

  • Model: [Fixed-effect / Random-effects (DerSimonian-Laird / REML)]
  • Software: [R metafor / RevMan / Stata]
  • OR if narrative: [SWiM approach, vote counting, effect direction plot]

13e. Heterogeneity exploration: [Methods used]

  • Subgroup analyses: [pre-specified subgroups and rationale]
  • Meta-regression: [covariates tested, if applicable]

13f. Sensitivity analyses: [Planned sensitivity analyses]

  1. Leave-one-out analysis
  2. Excluding high risk of bias studies
  3. Fixed-effect vs. random-effects comparison
  4. [Other analyses]

2.10 Reporting Bias Assessment [PRISMA Item 14]

[Methods to assess publication bias:]

  • Funnel plot (visual inspection)
  • Statistical test: [Egger's / Peter's / trim-and-fill]
  • Comparison of protocol to published reports

2.11 Certainty Assessment [PRISMA Item 15]

[Framework used to assess certainty of evidence:]

  • GRADE approach
  • Factors assessed: risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, publication bias
  • Rating up factors (for observational studies): large effect, dose-response, plausible confounding

3. Results

3.1 Study Selection [PRISMA Item 16a, 16b]

PRISMA Flow Diagram
 ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
 │                 IDENTIFICATION                      │
 ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
 │ Records identified from databases (n = )            │
 │   Database 1 (n = )                                 │
 │   Database 2 (n = )                                 │
 │   Database 3 (n = )                                 │
 │ Records identified from other sources (n = )        │
 │   Reference lists (n = )                            │
 │   Expert recommendations (n = )                     │
 └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                        │
 ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
 │ Records removed before screening:                   │
 │   Duplicate records (n = )                          │
 │   Records marked ineligible by automation (n = )    │
 │   Records removed for other reasons (n = )          │
 └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                        │
 ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
 │                  SCREENING                          │
 ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
 │ Records screened (n = )                             │
 │ Records excluded (n = )                             │
 └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                        │
 ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
 │ Reports sought for retrieval (n = )                 │
 │ Reports not retrieved (n = )                        │
 └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                        │
 ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
 │ Reports assessed for eligibility (n = )             │
 │ Reports excluded, with reasons (n = )               │
 │   Reason 1 (n = )                                   │
 │   Reason 2 (n = )                                   │
 │   Reason 3 (n = )                                   │
 └──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                        │
 ┌──────────────────────▼──────────────────────────────┐
 │                  INCLUDED                           │
 ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
 │ Studies included in review (n = )                   │
 │ Reports of included studies (n = )                  │
 │ Studies in quantitative synthesis (n = )             │
 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

[PRISMA Item 16b: Cite studies that appeared to meet inclusion criteria but were excluded, with reasons.]

3.2 Study Characteristics [PRISMA Item 17]

Table: Characteristics of Included Studies

Study Country Design Population (N) Intervention Comparator Outcome(s) Follow-up Funding
Author1 (Year) [country] [design] [N] [intervention] [comparator] [outcomes] [duration] [source]
Author2 (Year) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

3.3 Risk of Bias in Studies [PRISMA Item 18]

Table: Risk of Bias Summary (Traffic-Light)

Study D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 Overall
Author1 (Year) [L/S/H] [L/S/H] [L/S/H] [L/S/H] [L/S/H] [L/S/H]
Author2 (Year) ... ... ... ... ... ...

L = Low risk, S = Some concerns, H = High risk

[Narrative summary of risk of bias findings across studies]

3.4 Results of Individual Studies [PRISMA Item 19]

Table: Individual Study Results

Study Outcome Effect Estimate 95% CI p-value Weight
Author1 (Year) [outcome] [estimate] [lower, upper] [p] [%]
Author2 (Year) ... ... ... ... ...

3.5 Results of Syntheses [PRISMA Items 20a-20d]

Primary Outcome: [Name]

20a. Study characteristics: [Brief summary of contributing studies' characteristics and risk of bias]

20b. Pooled result:

  • Pooled effect: [estimate] (95% CI: [lower, upper])
  • Statistical significance: Z = [value], p = [value]
  • Heterogeneity: I² = [value]% (95% CI: [lower, upper]), Q = [value] (df = [n], p = [value]), tau² = [value]
  • Prediction interval: [lower, upper]

Forest Plot: [Insert or reference forest plot]

20c. Heterogeneity investigation:

  • Subgroup analyses: [results]
  • Meta-regression: [results, if conducted]

20d. Sensitivity analyses:

  1. Leave-one-out: [results — did any single study substantially change the estimate?]
  2. Excluding high-risk studies: [revised estimate]
  3. Fixed vs. random effects: [comparison]
Secondary Outcome(s): [Name]

[Repeat structure above for each secondary outcome]

3.6 Reporting Biases [PRISMA Item 21]

[Report assessments of publication bias:]

  • Funnel plot: [description of symmetry/asymmetry]
  • Statistical test: [result]
  • Trim-and-fill: [adjusted estimate, if applicable]
  • Other assessments: [protocol-outcome comparison]

3.7 Certainty of Evidence [PRISMA Item 22]

GRADE Summary of Findings Table

Outcome Studies (n) Participants (N) Effect (95% CI) Certainty Rationale
[Outcome 1] [n] [N] [estimate (CI)] [High/Moderate/Low/Very Low] [Reasons for up/downgrading]
[Outcome 2] [n] [N] [estimate (CI)] [level] [reasons]

4. Discussion [PRISMA Item 23]

4.1 Summary of Evidence

[Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence. Address:]

  • Main findings for each outcome
  • How findings compare to previous reviews
  • Consistency of findings across studies

4.2 Limitations

Limitations of the evidence:

  • [e.g., risk of bias across studies, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision]

Limitations of the review process:

  • [e.g., language restrictions, database coverage, inability to contact authors]

4.3 Implications

For practice:

  • [What practitioners should do based on these findings]

For research:

  • [Gaps identified, recommended future study designs]

For policy:

  • [Policy implications, if applicable]

5. Other Information

5.1 Registration and Protocol [PRISMA Item 24]

[Provide registration information and link to protocol:]

  • Registry: [e.g., PROSPERO]
  • Registration number: [number]
  • Protocol URL: [link]
  • Deviations from protocol: [describe any deviations and rationale]

5.2 Support [PRISMA Item 25]

[Describe sources of support:]

  • Financial: [funding sources and grant numbers]
  • Non-financial: [e.g., institutional support, access to databases]
  • Role of funder: [describe any role of funders in the review]

5.3 Competing Interests [PRISMA Item 26]

[Declare competing interests of all authors]

5.4 Availability of Data and Materials [PRISMA Item 27]

[Report availability of:]

  • Data extraction forms
  • Extracted data from included studies
  • Analysis code
  • List of excluded studies with reasons
  • PRISMA checklist (completed)

Appendices

Appendix A: Full Search Strategies

[Complete search strategies for all databases]

Appendix B: Excluded Studies with Reasons

Study Reason for Exclusion
[citation] [reason]

Appendix C: PRISMA 2020 Checklist

[Completed PRISMA 2020 checklist with page/section numbers for each item]

Item # Checklist Item Reported on Page/Section
1 Title [page]
2 Abstract [page]
... ... ...
27 Availability [page]

Source: SKILL.md on GitHub

No alerts1d5 checks · Risk SAFE
  • Gen Agent Trust Hub1d

    The deep-research skill is a highly sophisticated research orchestration system that includes robust internal security instructions to prevent prompt injection from untrusted data. It leverages well-known scholarly APIs for data verification and uses local scripts for deterministic validation of research artifacts.

  • Socket1d

    No alerts

  • Snyk1d

    Risk: LOW · No issues

  • Runlayer6mo

    7/41 files flagged

  • ZeroLeaks5mo

    Score: 93/100 · 2 sections analyzed

Signed by skilld at 0d17790. This ties the file your Agent reads to that commit on GitHub. It does not review the instructions.

Last checked against GitHub 2 days ago.

Activeupdated 2 days ago
Other metadata
metadata
{
  "version": "2.12.1",
  "last_updated": "2026-08-15",
  "status": "active",
  "data_access_level": "raw",
  "task_type": "open-ended",
  "related_skills": [
    "academic-paper",
    "academic-pipeline"
  ]
}

README badge

README badge for imbad0202/academic-research-skills/deep-research