Menu

Individual skill

jhe-rebuttal

0upvotes

Use when a Journal of Health Economics (JHE) decision letter arrives (R&R or reject-and-resubmit) and a response-to-referees letter plus revision plan must be drafted. Plans and structures the response; it does not run the new analysis (jhe-identification / jhe-robustness) or the submission preflight.

Journal-of-Health-Economics-Skills/skills/jhe-rebuttal/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
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)
1,411
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Rebuttal and Response Letter (jhe-rebuttal)

## When to trigger

- A JHE **R&R** or reject-and-resubmit decision letter has arrived
- You need to triage referee comments into must-do / argue / defer
- You are drafting the response-to-referees document and the revision plan
- Two referees disagree and you need a strategy that satisfies the editor

## How to read a JHE decision

The **editor's letter is the priority signal**: it tells you which referee concerns are binding. At JHE the binding asks cluster around **design credibility** (selection, concurrent policy, staggered-DiD bias, inference) and **honest scope** (a coverage/utilization effect is not welfare) before exposition. Because review is single-anonymized and the referees are health economists, expect institution-specific pushback you must answer with evidence, not assertion. With ≥2 reviewers you will sometimes face **conflicting requests**; the editor's letter, not a majority vote, resolves them — address the editor's stated priorities first and in full.

## Response-letter structure
Back to top