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.).
33k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
12
files
ships runnable scripts
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
32514
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself
Install
one command, takes just this skill from the repository
Conduct systematic, comprehensive literature reviews following rigorous academic methodology. Search multiple literature databases, synthesize findings thematically, verify all citations for accuracy, and generate professional output documents in markdown and PDF formats.
This skill uses the parallel-web skill (parallel-cli search) as the primary web search tool for broad academic literature discovery, supplemented by specialized database access skills (gget, bioservices, datacommons-client). It provides specialized tools for citation verification, result aggregation, and document generation.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
Conducting a systematic literature review for research or publication
Synthesizing current knowledge on a specific topic across multiple sources
Performing meta-analysis or scoping reviews
Writing the literature review section of a research paper or thesis
Investigating the state of the art in a research domain
Identifying research gaps and future directions
Requiring verified citations and professional formatting
Visual Enhancement with Scientific Schematics
⚠️ MANDATORY: Every literature review MUST include at least 1-2 AI-generated figures using the scientific-schematics skill.
This is not optional. Literature reviews without visual elements are incomplete. Before finalizing any document:
Generate at minimum ONE schematic or diagram (e.g., PRISMA flow diagram for systematic reviews)
Create publication-quality images with proper formatting
Review and refine through multiple iterations
Ensure accessibility (colorblind-friendly, high contrast)
Save outputs in the figures/ directory
When to add schematics:
PRISMA flow diagrams for systematic reviews
Literature search strategy flowcharts
Thematic synthesis diagrams
Research gap visualization maps
Citation network diagrams
Conceptual framework illustrations
Any complex concept that benefits from visualization
For detailed guidance on creating schematics, refer to the scientific-schematics skill documentation.
Core Workflow
A literature review runs in seven phases, documented in full with commands and templates
in references/core_workflow.md:
Planning and scoping — the question, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and scope.
Systematic literature search — multi-database searching with recorded queries.
Screening and selection — title/abstract then full-text screening with counts kept
for the PRISMA flow.
Data extraction and quality assessment — structured extraction and risk-of-bias
or quality appraisal.
Synthesis and analysis — thematic or quantitative synthesis across studies.
Citation verification — every citation checked against the actual source.
Document generation — assembling the review with a complete bibliography.
Record every search string and date as you go: a review that cannot reproduce its own
search is not systematic. Per-database search guidance and citation styles are in
references/search_and_citation.md, and a full worked
review is in references/example_workflow.md.
Best Practices
Search Strategy
Start with parallel-web: Use parallel-cli search with academic domains for initial broad coverage before querying specialized databases
Use multiple databases (minimum 3): Ensures comprehensive coverage — parallel-web counts as one source
Include preprint servers: Captures latest unpublished findings
Document everything: Search strings, dates, result counts for reproducibility — save all parallel-cli output to sources/
Test and refine: Run pilot searches, review results, adjust search terms
Sort by citations: When available, sort search results by citation count to surface influential work first
Use parallel-cli extract: Fetch full content from promising URLs found during search to verify relevance before full-text screening
Screening and Selection
Use multiple databases (minimum 3): Ensures comprehensive coverage
Include preprint servers: Captures latest unpublished findings
Document everything: Search strings, dates, result counts for reproducibility
Test and refine: Run pilot searches, review results, adjust search terms
Screening and Selection
Use clear criteria: Document inclusion/exclusion criteria before screening
Screen systematically: Title → Abstract → Full text
Document exclusions: Record reasons for excluding studies
Consider dual screening: For systematic reviews, have two reviewers screen independently
Synthesis
Organize thematically: Group by themes, NOT by individual studies
Synthesize across studies: Compare, contrast, identify patterns
Be critical: Evaluate quality and consistency of evidence
Identify gaps: Note what's missing or understudied
Quality and Reproducibility
Assess study quality: Use appropriate quality assessment tools
Verify all citations: Run verify_citations.py script
Document methodology: Provide enough detail for others to reproduce
Follow guidelines: Use PRISMA for systematic reviews
Writing
Be objective: Present evidence fairly, acknowledge limitations
Be systematic: Follow structured template
Be specific: Include numbers, statistics, effect sizes where available
Be clear: Use clear headings, logical flow, thematic organization
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
Single database search: Misses relevant papers; always search multiple databases
No search documentation: Makes review irreproducible; document all searches
Study-by-study summary: Lacks synthesis; organize thematically instead
Unverified citations: Leads to errors; always run verify_citations.py
Too broad search: Yields thousands of irrelevant results; refine with specific terms
Too narrow search: Misses relevant papers; include synonyms and related terms
Ignoring preprints: Misses latest findings; include bioRxiv, medRxiv, arXiv
No quality assessment: Treats all evidence equally; assess and report quality
Publication bias: Only positive results published; note potential bias
10. Outdated search: Field evolves rapidly; clearly state search date
Integration with Other Skills
This skill works seamlessly with other scientific skills:
Web Search & Extraction (parallel-web skill — PRIMARY)
parallel-cli search: Broad academic and general web search with domain filtering — use for initial scoping, finding papers, citation chaining, and supplementary searches
parallel-cli extract: Fetch full content from paper URLs, journal websites, and preprint servers — use for reading abstracts, extracting reference lists, and verifying paper details