Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Nejm Abstract

ASecurity

Use to write the NEJM structured abstract — four headed sections (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions), ≤250 words, with the trial registration number and funding source, leading the Results with the primary outcome reported as an effect size with a 95% CI. Late-stage polish skill.

1,052 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 6/6/2026
ai-agentsgo

Works with

cli

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 6/6/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill nejm-abstract --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Nejm Abstract?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Nejm Abstract
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/brycewang-stanford-nejm-abstract/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-nejm-abstract)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: nejm-abstract
description: Use to write the NEJM structured abstract — four headed sections (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions), ≤250 words, with the trial registration number and funding source, leading the Results with the primary outcome reported as an effect size with a 95% CI. Late-stage polish skill.
---

# Structured Abstract (nejm-abstract)

## When to trigger

- Significance, design, reporting, and statistics are settled (do this late).
- The abstract is unstructured prose, or exceeds the word cap.
- The Results section reports P values but not the primary outcome with its effect size and CI.
- The trial registration number and funding source are missing.

## The four required sections (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions)

NEJM uses a **structured abstract, ≤250 words**, with four headed sections. Confirm the exact cap against the current author guidelines; design for 250 as the ceiling.

### Background
One or two sentences: the clinical problem and the specific question. State why the question matters in practice — no extended literature review.

### Methods
Design (e.g., "randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial"), population and setting, intervention/comparator, randomization, the **pre-specified primary outcome** and key secondary outcomes, and the analysis population (intention-to-treat).

### Results
Lead with the **primary outcome**. Report the **effect size with a 95% confidence interval** — absolute difference and/or relative measure (hazard ratio, risk ratio, odds ratio) — plus the P value if used. Give the number analyzed per group. Report key secondary outcomes and serious adverse events. Numbers, not adjectives.

### Conclusions
One or two sentences answering the question, **calibrated to the evidence**. Name the comparator. End with the **trial registration number** and the **funding source**.

## Hard constraints

- [ ] ≤ ~250 words across the four sections (confirm against current guidelines).
- [ ] Four headed sections present: Background / Methods / Results / Conclusions.
- [ ] Primary outcome reported with **effect estimate + 95% CI** (not P alone).
- [ ] Analysis population (ITT) and per-group n stated.
- [ ] **Trial registration number** included (e.g., "ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000000").
- [ ] **Funding source** stated (e.g., "Funded by …").
- [ ] No undefined acronyms; no citations; no figure/table references.

## Concrete template (RCT)

```
BACKGROUND
[Clinical problem]. It is unknown whether [intervention] improves [patient-important
outcome] in [population].

METHODS
We conducted a [design, e.g., multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled]
trial. We randomly assigned [N] patients with [condition] to [intervention] or
[comparator]. The primary outcome was [outcome] at [time]. Analyses were performed
according to the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS
The primary outcome occurred in X of N patients ([x.x]%) in the [intervention] group and
in Y of N ([y.y]%) in the [comparator] group (absolute difference, [z.z] percentage points;
95% CI, [a] to [b]; hazard ratio, [h]; 95% CI, [c] to [d]; P=[p]). [Key secondary outcome].
[Serious adverse events by group].

CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with [condition], [intervention] [did/did not] [effect on outcome] as
compared with [comparator]. (Funded by [funder]; [TrialName] ClinicalTrials.gov number,
NCT00000000.)
```

## Output format

```
【Word count】 N ≤ 250
【Four sections present】 Background / Methods / Results / Conclusions — yes/no
【Primary outcome with effect + 95% CI】 yes/no + the numbers
【ITT + per-group n stated】 yes/no
【Registration number present】 yes/no (NCT…)
【Funding source present】 yes/no
【Acronym / citation hits removed】 [...]
【Next】 nejm-citation
```

## Anti-patterns

- **Do not** write an unstructured single-paragraph abstract — NEJM uses the four headed sections.
- **Do not** report only a P value for the primary outcome — give the effect estimate and 95% CI.
- **Do not** lead the Results with a secondary or subgroup finding.
- **Do not** omit the registration number or funding source — both belong in the Conclusions sentence.
- **Do not** state conclusions that outrun the data (over-claiming is a top rejection reason).

Attribution

brycewang-stanfordbrycewang-stanford
View sourceMore from brycewang-stanford →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Related Skills

Caveman

Ultra-compressed communication mode that cuts output tokens while keeping technical accuracy. Levels: lite, full, ultra and the wenyan variants. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief" or "less tokens".

1066601 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

693161 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3351 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

651 votes

math-skill

A comprehensive mathematical reasoning skill for AI assistants — handles arithmetic to research-level problems with rigorous step-by-step reasoning, systematic verification, and transparent uncertainty handling

381 votes
View all in ai-agents →