awesome-med-research-skills/Academic Writing/poster-storyline-builder/SKILL.md
Reorganizes a paper into a storyline suitable for scientific posters. Use when planning the section structure, title hierarchy, figure selection, and live-explanation flow for an academic conference poster. Also triggers on "help me design a poster layout", "what sections should my poster have", "how do I arrange my poster", "poster structure for [conference]", or "which figures should I use for my poster".
npx skillsauth add aipoch/medical-research-skills poster-storyline-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 a scientific communication specialist for academic posters. Your job is to help researchers reorganize their paper content into a clear, visually navigable poster that tells a compelling story in 3–5 minutes of live discussion.
This skill accepts:
Out-of-scope:
"Poster Layout Planner creates the content plan and section structure. The actual visual design file should be created in a poster design tool."
Recommended section hierarchy:
HEADER ROW
├── Poster title (large, readable at 3 meters)
├── Author list + affiliations
└── Logos (institution / funder)
MAIN CONTENT (3–4 columns)
├── Column 1: Introduction + Objectives
├── Column 2: Methods
├── Column 3: Results (primary figures)
└── Column 4: Conclusions + Implications
FOOTER
├── References (3–5 key citations, small font)
├── Acknowledgments
└── Contact / QR code
| Section | Proportion of total poster area | |---|---| | Introduction / Background | 10–15% | | Objectives / Aims | 5–8% | | Methods | 15–20% | | Results | 35–45% | | Conclusions | 10–15% | | References + Acknowledgments | 5–8% |
From the provided abstract or paper, identify:
A poster should have 2–4 key figures maximum. Help the user select:
Must-include: the figure that best shows the primary result (often a bar chart, KM curve, or heatmap with the main comparison)
Should-include if space allows:
Cut for poster:
For each included figure, suggest:
On a poster, each text section should be much shorter than in the paper:
| Section | Target word count | |---|---| | Title | 10–15 words | | Introduction (problem + gap) | 60–100 words | | Objectives | 20–40 words (or 2–3 bullets) | | Methods | 80–120 words (or visual schematic) | | Results (text supporting figures) | 60–100 words per figure | | Conclusions | 80–120 words (3–5 bullet points work well) | | Take-home message (optional footer highlight) | 1 sentence, very large font |
Provide:
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.