peer-review

Peer Review - Scientific Manuscript Peer Review Skill

Skill Overview

Peer Review is an AI-assisted skill for the systematic evaluation of scientific manuscripts and grant applications, supporting checklist-based methodological assessments, statistical analysis reviews, and reporting-standard compliance checks.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Journal Article Peer Review

When serving as a journal reviewer and needing to perform a comprehensive assessment of a submitted scientific paper, this skill provides a seven-stage systematic review process covering everything from preliminary screening to detailed section-by-section appraisal. It supports compliance checks against mainstream reporting standards such as CONSORT, STROBE, and PRISMA, helping you identify methodological flaws, statistical issues, or reporting omissions.

2. Research Grant Application Evaluation

Grant reviewers can use this skill to rigorously assess research proposals, focusing on the rigor of experimental design, statistical power analysis, sample size justification, and feasibility of the study plan. The skill provides structured review report templates to ensure evaluations are professional, specific, and constructive.

3. Improving Academic Writing Quality

Researchers can use this skill to pre-screen manuscripts before submission to proactively identify potential methodological problems, statistical analysis flaws, or incomplete reporting. By simulating the peer review process, it helps improve paper quality and increases acceptance likelihood.

Core Features

1. Seven-Stage Systematic Review Process

Provides a complete peer review workflow, including: initial assessment, detailed section-by-section review, methodological and statistical rigor assessment, reproducibility and transparency checks, figures and data presentation review, ethical considerations verification, and writing quality assessment. Each stage has clear review criteria and checklists.

2. Reporting-Standards Compliance Checks

Supports normative checks against major academic reporting standards, including CONSORT for clinical trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, ARRIVE for animal experiments, and MIAME/MINSEQE for genomics research. Ensures compliance with journal requirements and academic best practices.

3. Structured Review Report Generation

Provides a hierarchical review report structure comprising four levels: summary comments, major issues, minor issues, and author Q&A. Reports adopt a constructive, professional tone and provide specific, actionable revision suggestions to help authors improve research quality. Supports verbatim citations, section localization, and detailed issue lists.

Frequently Asked Questions

What types of research is this skill suitable for?

The Peer Review skill is suitable for original research articles, reviews and meta-analyses, methodological papers, short communications, and other types of academic publications. Whether you are reviewing clinical research, basic experiments, epidemiological surveys, or computational science papers, the skill can provide a targeted review framework.

How does it differ from the Scholar Evaluation skill?

Peer Review focuses on formal manuscript and grant reviews, emphasizing structured reports, checklist-style assessments, and constructive feedback; Scholar Evaluation, by contrast, emphasizes quantitative scoring frameworks and evaluation of academic output quality. Use Peer Review when drafting formal peer review comments; use Scholar Evaluation for quantitative assessment of academic outputs.

How is the validity of statistical analyses evaluated?

In the third stage, the skill provides a comprehensive statistical evaluation checklist, including: statistical assumption testing (normality, independence, homoscedasticity), effect size reporting, multiple testing correction, confidence intervals, sample size and power analysis, handling of missing data, and more. It also identifies common statistical errors, such as inappropriate choice of parametric tests, p-hacking, or overinterpretation of correlations.

Does this skill support reviews in Chinese?

Currently, the documentation and outputs of this skill are primarily in English, but Chinese can be used for internal reasoning and analysis during the review process. If you need to generate a review report in Chinese, it is recommended to translate it yourself afterward or use translation tools to assist.