Skill Tracer
Skills › Scientific Agent Skills › scientific-writing › reporting_guidelines.md

reporting_guidelines.md

107 lines · skills/scientific-writing/references/reporting_guidelines.md at 5f2bc03

Open on GitHub

Most marks come from matching words in the file, so treat them as pointers.

1# Reporting-Guideline Selection and Coverage
2

Reporting-Guideline Selection and Coverage

Raw lines 1 to 2
3## Purpose and limits
4
5Reporting guidelines help authors report study design, conduct, analysis, and findings
6completely enough for appraisal. They do not make a study rigorous, replace a protocol,
7repair missing methods, appraise risk of bias, certify compliance, or predict acceptance.
8The bundled selector and coverage checker are deliberately non-scoring [SW-S06, SW-S12].
9
10Always open the current official statement, checklist, explanation-and-elaboration
11document, relevant extensions, and target-journal instructions. The bundled registry is
12a dated routing aid, not a copy of any official checklist.

Purpose and limits

Reporting guidelines help authors report study design, conduct, analysis, and findings completely enough for appraisal. They do not make a study rigorous, replace a protocol, repair missing methods, appraise risk of bias, certify compliance, or predict acceptance. The bundled selector and coverage checker are deliberately non-scoring [SW-S06, SW-S12].

Always open the current official statement, checklist, explanation-and-elaboration document, relevant extensions, and target-journal instructions. The bundled registry is a dated routing aid, not a copy of any official checklist.

Raw lines 3 to 13
14## Current major guidance as researched
16- **Randomized-trial results:** CONSORT 2025. The joint official site provides the
17 statement, checklist, expanded checklist, flow diagram, and explanation and
18 elaboration [SW-S07, SW-S08].
19- **Randomized-trial protocols:** SPIRIT 2025 and its participant-timeline resources
20 [SW-S07, SW-S09].
21- **Systematic reviews and meta-analyses:** PRISMA 2020. Choose relevant extensions,
22 such as protocol, scoping-review, search, or diagnostic-accuracy guidance, from the
23 official PRISMA and EQUATOR sites [SW-S10, SW-S06].
24- **Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies:** STROBE and the applicable
25 design-specific checklist [SW-S11].
26- **Diagnostic-accuracy studies:** STARD 2015; add STARD-AI for an AI-centered
27 diagnostic-accuracy study [SW-S12, SW-S13].
28- **Clinical prediction models:** TRIPOD+AI 2024 covers regression and machine-learning
29 prediction-model studies and replaces TRIPOD 2015; add TRIPOD-LLM for biomedical or
30 healthcare LLM studies within its scope [SW-S14].
31- **Case reports:** CARE 2013, including consent-sensitive reporting [SW-S15].
32- **In vivo animal research:** ARRIVE 2.0, using both the Essential 10 and Recommended
33 Set as appropriate [SW-S16].
34- **Healthcare quality improvement:** SQUIRE 2.0 [SW-S17].
35- **Health economic evaluations:** CHEERS 2022 [SW-S18].
36- **Qualitative research:** use SRQR generally and verify whether COREQ or another
37 design-specific guideline is more appropriate through EQUATOR [SW-S06].
39For AI intervention trials or protocols, check CONSORT-AI or SPIRIT-AI in addition to
40the current parent statement. For routinely collected data, harms, equity, patient-
41reported outcomes, clusters, noninferiority, pilot studies, and other special designs,
42search EQUATOR for a current extension [SW-S06].

Current major guidance as researched

  • Randomized-trial results: CONSORT 2025. The joint official site provides the statement, checklist, expanded checklist, flow diagram, and explanation and elaboration [SW-S07, SW-S08].
  • Randomized-trial protocols: SPIRIT 2025 and its participant-timeline resources [SW-S07, SW-S09].
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA 2020. Choose relevant extensions, such as protocol, scoping-review, search, or diagnostic-accuracy guidance, from the official PRISMA and EQUATOR sites [SW-S10, SW-S06].
  • Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies: STROBE and the applicable design-specific checklist [SW-S11].
  • Diagnostic-accuracy studies: STARD 2015; add STARD-AI for an AI-centered diagnostic-accuracy study [SW-S12, SW-S13].
  • Clinical prediction models: TRIPOD+AI 2024 covers regression and machine-learning prediction-model studies and replaces TRIPOD 2015; add TRIPOD-LLM for biomedical or healthcare LLM studies within its scope [SW-S14].
  • Case reports: CARE 2013, including consent-sensitive reporting [SW-S15].
  • In vivo animal research: ARRIVE 2.0, using both the Essential 10 and Recommended Set as appropriate [SW-S16].
  • Healthcare quality improvement: SQUIRE 2.0 [SW-S17].
  • Health economic evaluations: CHEERS 2022 [SW-S18].
  • Qualitative research: use SRQR generally and verify whether COREQ or another design-specific guideline is more appropriate through EQUATOR [SW-S06].

For AI intervention trials or protocols, check CONSORT-AI or SPIRIT-AI in addition to the current parent statement. For routinely collected data, harms, equity, patient- reported outcomes, clusters, noninferiority, pilot studies, and other special designs, search EQUATOR for a current extension [SW-S06].

Raw lines 14 to 43
44## Selector
46Use the offline registry:
48```bash
49python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design randomized_trial
50python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design randomized_trial --protocol
51python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design diagnostic_accuracy --ai
52python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design prediction_model --ai --llm
53```
55The result is a candidate set. A human must confirm:
57- the actual design and article type;
58- whether a protocol or results report is being written;
59- every relevant extension;
60- current version and corrections;
61- target-journal requirements.
63If no local match exists, search the official EQUATOR library rather than forcing the
64nearest guideline.

Selector

Use the offline registry:

python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design randomized_trial
python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design randomized_trial --protocol
python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design diagnostic_accuracy --ai
python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py select --study-design prediction_model --ai --llm

The result is a candidate set. A human must confirm:

  • the actual design and article type;
  • whether a protocol or results report is being written;
  • every relevant extension;
  • current version and corrections;
  • target-journal requirements.

If no local match exists, search the official EQUATOR library rather than forcing the nearest guideline.

Raw lines 44 to 65
Runs code python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py :49
66## Coverage record
68The bundled `coverage_topics` are original high-level prompts. They do not reproduce
69official item wording or numbering.
71For each topic, record:
73- `addressed`, with manuscript locations;
74- `not_applicable`, with a rationale;
75- `missing`.
77Then run:
79```bash
80python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py check reporting_coverage.json
81```
83A pass means every bundled topic has an allowed status and location or rationale. It
84does not mean every official checklist item is satisfied or well reported.

Coverage record

The bundled coverage_topics are original high-level prompts. They do not reproduce official item wording or numbering.

For each topic, record:

  • addressed, with manuscript locations;
  • not_applicable, with a rationale;
  • missing.

Then run:

python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py check reporting_coverage.json

A pass means every bundled topic has an allowed status and location or rationale. It does not mean every official checklist item is satisfied or well reported.

Raw lines 66 to 85
Runs code python3 scripts/select_reporting_guidelines.py :80
86## Workflow
881. Select candidate guidance during planning.
892. Open the official statement and explanation document.
903. Record prospective items in the protocol, registry, or analysis plan where
91 applicable.
924. Draft the manuscript from evidence and methods records.
935. Complete the official checklist with actual manuscript locations.
946. Record missing items honestly; do not invent information to fill them.
957. Submit the official checklist or flow diagram if the journal requires it.
968. Re-check guideline and journal versions immediately before submission.

Workflow

  1. Select candidate guidance during planning.
  2. Open the official statement and explanation document.
  3. Record prospective items in the protocol, registry, or analysis plan where applicable.
  4. Draft the manuscript from evidence and methods records.
  5. Complete the official checklist with actual manuscript locations.
  6. Record missing items honestly; do not invent information to fill them.
  7. Submit the official checklist or flow diagram if the journal requires it.
  8. Re-check guideline and journal versions immediately before submission.
Raw lines 86 to 97
98## Frequent errors
100- treating a checklist as a design-quality score;
101- claiming adherence when only a subset was reviewed;
102- using an outdated parent statement while overlooking a current update;
103- omitting a relevant extension;
104- writing a missing method into the paper as though it occurred;
105- checking boxes without recording manuscript locations;
106- assuming a journal endorsement means submission requirements are identical across
107 article types.

Frequent errors

  • treating a checklist as a design-quality score;
  • claiming adherence when only a subset was reviewed;
  • using an outdated parent statement while overlooking a current update;
  • omitting a relevant extension;
  • writing a missing method into the paper as though it occurred;
  • checking boxes without recording manuscript locations;
  • assuming a journal endorsement means submission requirements are identical across article types.
Raw lines 98 to 107