Open Skills Logo
Open Skills

peer-review

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

Author

@K-Dense-AI

Category

Content Creation

Install

Hot:7

Download and extract to your skills directory

Copy command and send to AI Agent for auto-install:

Download and install this skill https://openskills.cc/api/download?slug=k-dense-ai-skills-peer-review&locale=en&source=copy

Structured Peer Review Tool — Scientific Papers & Grant Review System

Skills Overview


Peer review is a professional, structured peer-review skill that provides checklist-based tools for evaluating scientific manuscripts and grant applications. It covers methodological assessment, statistical validity analysis, and compliance checks with reporting standards. It is suitable for journal peer review, research funding evaluations, and academic quality assessments.

Applicable Scenarios


  • Journal article peer review: Systematically assess the research design, statistical methods, and reporting quality of scientific manuscripts to ensure publication meets academic standards and journal requirements.

  • Grant application review: Evaluate a research proposal’s innovation, methodological feasibility, statistical power, and budget reasonableness to provide a scientific basis for funding decisions.

  • Academic quality assessment & training: Provide structured review frameworks for researchers, graduate students, and journal reviewers to improve review quality and consistency.

    • Core Features


  • Systematic review workflow: Provide a complete framework from initial screening to detailed, phased reviews, including checklist-based assessment criteria for sections such as abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion.

  • Methodological quality evaluation: Check key elements such as study design, sample size calculation, randomization and grouping, blinding implementation, and control settings, identifying common methodological weaknesses.

  • Reporting standards compliance checks: Verify alignment with discipline-specific reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, and ARRIVE to ensure transparency and reproducibility.

    • Frequently Asked Questions

    What types of research is this peer-review skill suitable for?


    The peer-review skill applies to a wide range of research areas, including biomedical research (CONSORT, STROBE standards), systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA standards), animal studies (ARRIVE standards), social science research, and engineering technology research. The skill provides dedicated review criteria for different study types (original research, reviews, methodological papers, and brief reports).

    How do you ensure the review is constructive and professional?


    The skill emphasizes constructive, professional, and collaborative review principles. Reviewers are required to provide specific—not vague—criticism, balance strengths and weaknesses, avoid personal attacks or condescending language. Reviews should be based on scientific content rather than the scientist personally, offer actionable, concrete recommendations, and provide a clear overall assessment and suggestions at the end.

    How does this skill help identify statistical issues in research?


    The skill provides a comprehensive statistical evaluation checklist, covering common issues such as statistical hypothesis testing, effect size reporting, multiple-comparison correction, confidence intervals, sample size rationale, appropriate choice of parametric versus nonparametric tests, and handling missing data. The review workflow also includes identifying shortcomings in data visualization, selective reporting, overfitting, batch effects, and other data analysis problems such as confounding variables.