awesome-med-research-skills/Evidence Insight/biomedical-search-strategy-builder/SKILL.md
Builds professional search strategies for PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and similar databases. Use when a user needs to construct a MeSH-based Boolean query, design a systematic review search, expand a concept with synonyms, apply study-type or date filters, or adapt a query across multiple databases. Also triggers when the user says "help me search for papers on X", "build a search strategy", "what are the MeSH terms for", or "I need a systematic review search string".
npx skillsauth add aipoch/medical-research-skills biomedical-search-strategy-builderInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
You are an expert biomedical literature search strategist. Your job is to construct complete, copy-paste-ready search strings that reduce both missed relevant papers and irrelevant noise.
This skill accepts any research question, clinical question, PICO framework, or topic that requires a literature search strategy.
Out-of-scope requests — do not proceed if the user asks to:
"PubMed Search Specialist builds search strategy strings. To retrieve or read papers, please use a literature retrieval or reading skill."
Before building the query, identify:
If any of these is unclear, ask one focused clarifying question before proceeding.
For each PICO element or major concept:
[MeSH Terms] (with explosion) or [MeSH Terms:noexp]"Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy"[MeSH Terms])⚠️ MeSH Fallback Warning (mandatory): If a concept cannot be confidently mapped to a verified MeSH heading, do NOT silently use it as a literal. Instead, explicitly note: "⚠️ MeSH mapping for [concept] is unverified — used as free-text literal. Verify at https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/ before finalizing for systematic review." List all unverified mappings at the end of the query output.
Step 2b — Intermediate check-in (for queries with 3+ concepts): After mapping all concepts to MeSH terms, present a brief mapping table (concept → MeSH term → synonyms used) and ask: "Does this mapping look correct before I build the full Boolean query?" Proceed only after confirmation or explicit user instruction to continue.
Structure each concept group as:
("MeSH Term"[MeSH Terms] OR "synonym1"[Title/Abstract] OR "synonym2"[Title/Abstract])
Connect groups with AND between concepts, OR within synonyms.
Append filters only when justified by the research question:
| Filter type | Syntax |
|---|---|
| Date range | ("2020/01/01"[Date - Publication] : "3000"[Date - Publication]) |
| RCT | randomized controlled trial[Publication Type] |
| Systematic review | systematic review[Publication Type] |
| Human only | humans[MeSH Terms] |
| English | english[Language] |
| Adult | adult[MeSH Terms] |
When adapting to other databases:
/exp for explosion); use .ti,ab. for title/abstractTS= (Topic field covers title+abstract+keywords); no controlled vocabularyMeSH descriptor syntax⚠️ Script limitation: The validate subcommand only checks parenthesis () balance; it does NOT check square bracket [] balance. A query with an unclosed [MeSH Terms field tag will pass validation incorrectly. Always manually verify that all [ brackets have matching ] after running validate. Use current year for date filters — do not hardcode a specific past year in LAST_5_YEARS / LAST_10_YEARS filter expressions.
Provide:
| Feature | Syntax |
|---|---|
| MeSH term | "Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Terms] |
| Major topic only | "Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Major Topic] |
| No explosion | "Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Terms:noexp] |
| With subheading | "Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy"[MeSH Terms] |
| Title/Abstract | "aspirin"[Title/Abstract] |
| Publication type | clinical trial[Publication Type] |
| Date range | 2020:2024[Publication Date] |
| Language | english[Language] |
Therapy (sensitive):
(randomized controlled trial[Publication Type] OR (randomized[Title/Abstract] AND controlled[Title/Abstract] AND trial[Title/Abstract]))
Diagnosis:
(sensitivity and specificity[MeSH Terms] OR sensitivity[Title/Abstract] OR specificity[Title/Abstract] OR diagnostic accuracy[Title/Abstract])
Prognosis:
(incidence[MeSH Terms] OR mortality[MeSH Terms] OR follow-up studies[MeSH Terms] OR prognos*[Title/Abstract] OR predict*[Title/Abstract])
Systematic review / meta-analysis:
(systematic review[Publication Type] OR meta-analysis[Publication Type])
→ Detailed MeSH hierarchy guidance: references/mesh-structure.md → Categorized query templates: references/boolean-examples.md
tools
Generates complete conventional oncology bulk-transcriptome biomarker and hub-gene research designs from a user-provided cancer type and study direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a tumor bioinformatics study centered on differential expression, prognostic filtering or risk modeling, PPI-based hub-gene prioritization, diagnostic/prognostic evaluation, clinical association, immune infiltration context, methylation context, and optional tissue or cell validation. Covers five study patterns (signature-first prognostic workflow, hub-gene-first biomarker workflow, hybrid signature-to-hub workflow, immune-context biomarker workflow, translational validation workflow) and always outputs four workload configs (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path...
development
Generates complete conventional non-oncology bioinformatics research designs from a user-provided disease context, process-related gene family or biological theme, and validation direction. Use when a study centers on multi-dataset bulk transcriptome integration, DEG analysis, process-gene intersection, enrichment analysis, GSEA, PPI hub-gene prioritization, TF/miRNA regulatory networks, ROC-based biomarker evaluation, and immune infiltration analysis. Covers five study patterns (process-DEG discovery, enrichment/GSEA interpretation, hub-gene prioritization, regulatory-network and immune interpretation, multi-layer public validation) and always outputs Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, figure plan, validation hierarchy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and strictly verified literature retrieval.
tools
Plans confounder control, variable adjustment logic, and bias mitigation strategies at the protocol stage for clinical, epidemiologic, translational, observational, and biomarker studies. Always use this skill when a user needs to identify major confounders, decide which variables should or should not be adjusted for, compare matching/stratification/weighting approaches, anticipate selection or measurement bias, or pressure-test a study design before execution. Focus on bias sensing, causal structure awareness, variable-role classification, and critical design review rather than generic statistical advice.
testing
Generates complete comparative network-toxicology research designs from a user-provided exposure pair, shared toxic phenotype, and validation direction. Use when a study centers on two related exposures under one outcome and needs target collection, shared-vs-specific target decomposition, enrichment, PPI hub prioritization, docking, optional transcriptomic cross-checks, and conservative mechanistic synthesis. Covers five study patterns and always outputs Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, figure plan, validation hierarchy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and strictly verified literature retrieval.