skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/research/paper-review/latte-review-guide/SKILL.md
Automate systematic literature reviews with LatteReview AI agents
npx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research latte-review-guideInstall 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.
LatteReview is a low-code Python package that uses AI agents to automate systematic literature reviews. It handles title/abstract screening, full-text assessment, data extraction, and PRISMA-compliant reporting — tasks that typically consume hundreds of researcher-hours. Supports multiple LLM backends (Anthropic, OpenAI, local models).
pip install lattereview
from lattereview import ReviewProject
# Create a new review project
project = ReviewProject(
name="ML in Medical Imaging Review",
research_question="What deep learning architectures are used for "
"medical image segmentation?",
inclusion_criteria=[
"Uses deep learning for medical image segmentation",
"Published in peer-reviewed venue",
"Reports quantitative evaluation metrics",
],
exclusion_criteria=[
"Review/survey articles",
"Non-English publications",
"Conference abstracts only",
],
)
# Import from various sources
project.import_papers("scopus_export.csv", source="scopus")
project.import_papers("pubmed_export.csv", source="pubmed")
# Or from a DataFrame
import pandas as pd
df = pd.read_csv("papers.csv")
project.import_from_dataframe(df,
title_col="title",
abstract_col="abstract",
year_col="year",
)
print(f"Imported {project.total_papers} papers")
from lattereview.agents import ScreeningAgent
# Configure screening agent
screener = ScreeningAgent(
llm_provider="anthropic",
model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
criteria=project.inclusion_criteria,
exclusion=project.exclusion_criteria,
)
# Title/abstract screening
results = screener.screen(
project.papers,
mode="title_abstract",
confidence_threshold=0.7,
)
# Results include: decision, confidence, reasoning
for paper in results[:3]:
print(f"{paper.title}")
print(f" Decision: {paper.decision} "
f"(confidence: {paper.confidence:.2f})")
print(f" Reason: {paper.reasoning}")
from lattereview.agents import ExtractionAgent
extractor = ExtractionAgent(
llm_provider="anthropic",
fields={
"architecture": "Deep learning architecture used",
"dataset": "Medical imaging dataset",
"modality": "Imaging modality (CT, MRI, X-ray, etc.)",
"dice_score": "Best Dice similarity coefficient reported",
"sample_size": "Number of images/patients",
},
)
extracted = extractor.extract(project.included_papers)
# Export structured data
extracted.to_csv("extracted_data.csv")
# PRISMA flow diagram
project.generate_prisma_diagram("prisma.png")
# Summary statistics
summary = project.summarize()
print(f"Screened: {summary['screened']}")
print(f"Included: {summary['included']}")
print(f"Excluded: {summary['excluded']}")
# Use different LLM providers
screener = ScreeningAgent(
llm_provider="openai",
model="gpt-4o",
)
# Local models via Ollama
screener = ScreeningAgent(
llm_provider="ollama",
model="llama3",
base_url="http://localhost:11434",
)
# Simulate dual-reviewer screening for reliability
results = screener.dual_screen(
project.papers,
models=["claude-sonnet-4-20250514", "gpt-4o"],
agreement_threshold=0.8,
)
# Papers with disagreement flagged for human review
conflicts = [p for p in results if p.agreement < 0.8]
print(f"{len(conflicts)} papers need human adjudication")
development
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
development
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
testing
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
data-ai
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.