More screenshots

    Works with the AI Agents you already use

    Claude CodeClaude CodeCursorCursorCodex CLICodex CLIMuseMuseDotsDots+22 more

    Medical & Clinical Writing Skill

    1

    Scientific writing and QC skill for medical manuscripts, clinical reports, and regulatory documentation support.

    $29.99

    Secure checkout via Stripe

    Money-back guarantee

    Converts to your local currency at checkout

    Security scanned
    Medical & Clinical Writing Skill

    Medical & Clinical Writing Skill

    Example session with this skill installed

    Draft a structured journal abstract for a Phase II study on drug X for hypertension based on the provided CSR summary. Use IMRaD format and include a QC check for numerical consistency.

    • Read your context and instructions
    • Compiled the medical & clinical

    The draft abstract for the Phase II hypertension study has been generated using the IMRaD framework. A consistency audit was performed against the provided CSR summary.

    Phase II Study Abstract: Drug X in Essential Hypertension

    Background: Drug X is a novel selective antagonist. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of Drug X in patients with grade 1-2 essential hypertension.
    Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients (n=120) were randomized 1:1 to receive Drug X 20mg or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in mean seated systolic blood pressure (msSBP).
    Results: At week 12, Drug X demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in msSBP compared to placebo (-14.2 mmHg vs -3.5 mmHg; p < 0.001). Adverse events were reported in 12% of the Drug X group compared to 10% in the placebo group; most were mild in severity.
    Conclusions: Drug X significantly reduced SBP in patients with essential hypertension and was generally well-tolerated.

    QC Findings

    IssueSeverityEvidenceRecommended Action
    p-value precisionMinorCSR Table 14.2 lists p=0.0008Update "p < 0.001" to "p = 0.0008" per style guide
    Adverse Event CountQueryText says 12%, but Table 14.3.1 implies 12/60 (20%)[VERIFY AGAINST SOURCE] Table 14.3.1

    Next steps

    1. Reconcile the Adverse Event percentage in the Results section with Table 14.3.1.
    2. Verify the specific p-value formatting requirements for the target journal.
    3. Submit the draft for formal Medical/Clinical review.

    Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.

    About this skill

    Writing for medical, clinical, and pharmaceutical contexts requires extreme precision and strict adherence to evidence. This skill provides a structured framework for drafting and auditing scientific documents, ensuring every claim maps directly to source data without fabrication. It eliminates the risk of AI hallucinations in sensitive clinical reporting by enforcing a "traceability first" workflow.

    What it does

    • Structured drafting generates outlines and drafts for 35 document types, including IMRaD manuscripts, CSR sections, and congress abstracts.
    • Scientific consistency checking audits numerical values, units, p-values, and confidence intervals across text, tables, and figures.
    • Evidence mapping links substantive scientific claims to specific source locators or flags them for manual verification.
    • Regulatory QC support provides checklists for MLR review, benefit-risk summaries, and investigator brochures.
    • Privacy scrubbing identifies and prompts for the removal of unnecessary patient identifiers or sensitive data in case narratives.

    How it works

    1. Intake and classification analyzes source materials and selects the appropriate document framework from the library.
    2. Content mapping defines sections and key messages based on the protocol, SAP, or clinical data provided.
    3. Execution and audit drafts the content using neutral scientific language while performing simultaneous internal consistency checks.
    4. Handoff reporting delivers the draft alongside a QC table, evidence notes, and a list of required human approvals.

    Framework & tools

    This skill is designed for medical writers and clinical researchers working with structured data sources like protocols, SAPs, and clinical study reports. It follows standard scientific reporting conventions such as IMRaD and CTD structures.

    Why this beats prompting it yourself

    Generic prompts often hallucinate citations or smooth over statistical nuances that change clinical meaning. This skill enforces a specialized workflow that prioritizes data integrity, separates inference from fact, and explicitly flags unresolved compliance questions.

    Use cases

    • Drafting structured journal abstracts from a completed clinical study report.
    • Performing a consistency audit between a manuscript draft and its source data tables.
    • Preparing a plain-language summary of complex research for non-specialist audiences.
    • Creating a scientific poster content outline for an upcoming medical congress.

    Known limitations

    This skill cannot verify external citations without browsing tools and does not replace qualified medical, statistical, or legal review. It requires supplied source documents to function.

    How to use

    Skills on Agensi run inside your AI agent. Copy the prompt, paste it into your agent, and it connects to Agensi and installs this skill for you. If a payment is needed, your agent shows it to you first.

    Reviews

    No reviews yet

    Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill passes our trust checks below.

    Security scanned

    Passed our 8-point scan before listing

    Fresh listing

    Recently published to Agensi

    Money-back guarantee

    Doesn't do what its page promises? You get your money back.

    Trust & safety

    Security scanned

    Verified clean today

    • Passed all security checks, Safe to install

    Listedtoday

    What's inside

    Frequently Asked Questions