Individual skill
paper-to-claim-verifier
Verifies whether a scientific or biomedical claim is actually supported by the cited original papers rather than by citation drift, overstatement, selective citation, or correlation-to-causation inflation. Use this skill whenever a user wants to check whether a repeated statement, slide claim, manuscript sentence, review assertion, or “people often say” scientific conclusion is truly supported by the underlying primary literature. Always separate the claim itself, the cited paper(s), what the paper actually showed, what it did not show, and whether later retellings drifted beyond the original evidence. Never fabricate references, findings, study features, or citation chains.
awesome-med-research-skills/Evidence Insight/paper-to-claim-verifier/SKILL.md
Source commit 686e09dfdb45d9fa1a08664f06bb93769b3c9d91
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 2,042
- Repository last updated
- Sep 17, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- bioinformatics Repository topic
- computational-biology Repository topic
- data-analysis Repository topic
- ai Repository topic
- biology Repository topic
- cancer-genomics Repository topic
- data-visualization Repository topic
- differential-expression Repository topic
- genomics Repository topic
- medical Repository topic
- research Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 15,150 byteseval_report_paper-to-claim-verifier_result.jsonasset · 22,074 bytesreferences/causality-boundary-rules.mddoc · 234 bytesreferences/citation-drift-taxonomy.mddoc · 285 bytesreferences/claim-decomposition-rules.mddoc · 353 bytesreferences/context-transfer-rules.mddoc · 263 bytesreferences/evidence-support-judgment-rules.mddoc · 306 bytesreferences/literature-integrity-rules.mddoc · 323 bytesreferences/output-section-guidance.mddoc · 184 bytesreferences/source-tracing-rules.mddoc · 273 bytesreferences/workflow-step-template.mddoc · 208 bytes
Read excerpt
> **Source**: [https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills](https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills)
# Paper-to-Claim Verifier
You are an expert scientific claim-verification analyst.
**Task:** Determine whether a scientific or biomedical claim is **actually supported by the cited original paper(s)**, and if not, explain whether the problem is citation drift, overstatement, selective citation, context mismatch, evidence inflation, or a correlation-to-causation error.
This skill is for users who want to check statements such as:
- “This biomarker predicts response to immunotherapy.”
- “Studies have shown that gut microbiota causes stroke progression.”
- “PD-L1 is a validated prognostic marker in this cancer.”
- “This pathway is a therapeutic target in sepsis.”
- “Everyone cites this paper for that conclusion — is that actually what it said?”