Literature Review
Produce a structured academic-style literature review document with methodology, PRISMA framing, and research questions.
Overview
Literature-review is an agent skill most often used in Idea (also Validate) that generates a structured academic literature review document from a fill-in template.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/davila7/claude-code-templates --skill literature-reviewWhat is this skill?
- Full manuscript scaffold: abstract, introduction, methodology, and significance sections
- Supports narrative, systematic, scoping, meta-analysis, and umbrella review types
- PRISMA compliance and PROSPERO registration placeholders
- Explicit primary research questions and protocol deviation documentation
- 5 review types enumerated (narrative, systematic, scoping, meta-analysis, umbrella)
Adoption & trust: 1.6k installs on skills.sh; 27.8k GitHub stars; 2/3 security scanners passed (skills.sh audits).
What problem does it solve?
You have sources and questions but no consistent structure for a defensible, citable synthesis of prior work.
Who is it for?
Builders and researchers drafting systematic or narrative reviews, market-tech surveys, or evidence summaries before product decisions.
Skip if: Quick competitor landing copy, automated PubMed queries, or ship-phase API documentation.
When should I use this skill?
Use when you need to draft or structure a formal literature review with methodology, PRISMA, and research questions.
What do I get? / Deliverables
You get a PRISMA-aware review outline with methodology, research questions, and results sections ready to populate from your search strategy.
- Structured literature review markdown or document
- Methodology and abstract sections ready for citation fill-in
Recommended Skills
Journey fit
Spans multiple journey phases - primary shelf plus alternate fits below.
Literature synthesis belongs earliest in the journey when you are exploring a problem space before committing to build scope. Research is the canonical shelf because the output is a review manuscript template, not a shipped product feature.
Where it fits
Frame primary research questions before choosing an AI tooling niche.
Document evidence gaps to justify narrowing MVP features.
Publish a technical survey page that cites synthesized prior art.
How it compares
A writing template for scholarly synthesis, not a live literature search MCP or citation manager integration.
Common Questions / FAQ
Who is literature-review for?
Solo builders, students, and indie researchers who need a formal review document structure without starting from a blank page.
When should I use literature-review?
Use it in Idea while mapping a domain, in Validate when scoping claims with evidence, or in Build docs when publishing a technical survey alongside your product.
Is literature-review safe to install?
It is a document template skill; review the Security Audits panel on this page before installing any skill from the catalog.
SKILL.md
READMESKILL.md - Literature Review
# [Literature Review Title] **Authors**: [Author Names and Affiliations] **Date**: [Date] **Review Type**: [Narrative / Systematic / Scoping / Meta-Analysis / Umbrella Review] **Review Protocol**: [PROSPERO ID if registered, or state "Not registered"] **PRISMA Compliance**: [Yes/No/Partial - specify which guidelines] --- ## Abstract **Background**: [Context and rationale] **Objectives**: [Primary and secondary objectives] **Methods**: [Databases, dates, selection criteria, quality assessment] **Results**: [n studies included; key findings by theme] **Conclusions**: [Main conclusions and implications] **Registration**: [PROSPERO ID or "Not registered"] **Keywords**: [5-8 keywords] --- ## 1. Introduction ### 1.1 Background and Context [Provide background information on the topic. Establish why this literature review is important and timely. Discuss the broader context and current state of knowledge.] ### 1.2 Scope and Objectives [Clearly define the scope of the review and state the specific objectives. What questions will this review address?] **Primary Research Questions:** 1. [Research question 1] 2. [Research question 2] 3. [Research question 3] ### 1.3 Significance [Explain the significance of this review. Why is it important to synthesize this literature now? What gaps does it fill?] --- ## 2. Methodology ### 2.1 Protocol and Registration **Protocol**: [PROSPERO ID / OSF link / Not registered] **Deviations**: [Document any protocol deviations] **PRISMA**: [Checklist in Appendix B] ### 2.2 Search Strategy **Databases:** [PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, bioRxiv, etc.] **Supplementary:** [Citation chaining, grey literature, trial registries] **Search String Example:** ``` ("CRISPR"[Title/Abstract] OR "Cas9"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("disease"[MeSH Terms]) AND ("2015/01/01"[Date] : "2024/12/31"[Date]) ``` **Dates:** [YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD] | **Executed:** [Date] **Validation:** [Key papers used to test search strategy] ### 2.3 Tools and Software **Screening:** [Rayyan, Covidence, ASReview] **Analysis:** [VOSviewer, R, Python] **Citation Management:** [Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote] **AI Tools:** [Any AI-assisted tools used; document validation approach] ### 2.4 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria **Inclusion Criteria:** - [Criterion 1: e.g., Published between 2015-2024] - [Criterion 2: e.g., Peer-reviewed articles and preprints] - [Criterion 3: e.g., English language] - [Criterion 4: e.g., Human or animal studies] - [Criterion 5: e.g., Original research or systematic reviews] **Exclusion Criteria:** - [Criterion 1: e.g., Case reports with n<5] - [Criterion 2: e.g., Conference abstracts without full text] - [Criterion 3: e.g., Editorials and commentaries] - [Criterion 4: e.g., Duplicate publications] - [Criterion 5: e.g., Retracted articles] - [Criterion 6: e.g., Studies with unavailable full text after author contact] ### 2.5 Study Selection **Reviewers:** [n independent reviewers] | **Conflict resolution:** [Method] **Inter-rater reliability:** [Cohen's kappa = X] **PRISMA Flow:** ``` Records identified: n=[X] → Deduplicated: n=[Y] → Title/abstract screened: n=[Y] → Full-text assessed: n=[Z] → Included: n=[N] ``` **Exclusion reasons:** [List with counts] ### 2.6 Data Extraction **Method:** [Standardized form (Appendix E); pilot-tested on n studies] **Extractors:** [n independent] | **Verification:** [Double-checked] **Items:** Study ID, design, population, interventions/exposures, outcomes, statistics, funding, COI, bias domains **Missing data:** [Author contact protocol] ### 2.7 Quality Assessment **Tool:** [Cochrane RoB 2.0 / ROBINS-I / Newcastle-Ottawa / AMSTAR 2 / JBI] **Method:** [2 independent reviewers; third for conflicts] **Rating:** [Low/Moderate/High risk of bias] **Publication bias:** [Funnel plots, Egger's test - if meta-analysis] ### 2.8 Synthesis and Analysis **Approach:** [Narrative / Meta-analysis / Both] **Statistics** (if meta-analysis): E