Use when deciding which pnasnexus-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a manuscript from scope/significance test through reviewer rebuttal for PNAS Nexus (the fully open-access sibling journal of PNAS, published by Oxford University Press for the U.S. National Academy of Sciences). Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill pnasnexus-workflow --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pnasnexus Workflow?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-pnasnexus-workflow)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: pnasnexus-workflow
description: Use when deciding which pnasnexus-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a manuscript from scope/significance test through reviewer rebuttal for PNAS Nexus (the fully open-access sibling journal of PNAS, published by Oxford University Press for the U.S. National Academy of Sciences). Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
---
# PNAS Nexus Workflow Router (pnasnexus-workflow)
## Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you **which pnasnexus-* skill to use at the current stage** of a manuscript aimed at *PNAS Nexus*.
**PNAS Nexus is not flagship PNAS.** It is the **gold open-access sibling journal**, published by **Oxford University Press (OUP)** in partnership with the **National Academy of Sciences (NAS)**. Two things reshape the workflow relative to the `pnas-skills` pack and must be settled early: (1) it is **fully open access with an article processing charge (APC)** and a **CC BY / CC BY-NC license choice** (`pnasnexus-openaccess`), and (2) it has **no Direct/Contributed submission track** — every paper goes through standard editor-assigned peer review. PNAS Nexus also has a **transfer route from flagship PNAS** that carries reviews over (`pnasnexus-fit`).
## When to trigger
- "What should I do next with this draft?"
- A draft arrives and you must diagnose the current bottleneck.
- The user just had a paper declined by PNAS and is considering the PNAS Nexus transfer.
- The user is unsure about open-access cost, waivers, or which license to pick.
- Reviews arrive from PNAS Nexus and you need to switch into rebuttal mode.
## The single most important gate
Route to `pnasnexus-fit` first, always. The first question is **"is this high-quality, broadly significant, multidisciplinary research that the PNAS Nexus readership across biological/health/medical, physical sciences & engineering, and social & political sciences would value?"** PNAS Nexus is positioned as a **complementary, broad-scope sibling** to PNAS — including via a **transfer route** for sound work declined at PNAS — so `pnasnexus-fit` also handles the "we were declined at PNAS, is the transfer right?" decision.
> **Settle open access early.** Because every PNAS Nexus article is OA and carries an APC, confirm funding, eligibility for a waiver/discount, and license choice *before* you invest in polishing — run `pnasnexus-openaccess` right after `pnasnexus-fit`.
## Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
| Not sure the result fits PNAS Nexus, or deciding whether to transfer from PNAS | `pnasnexus-fit` |
| Unsure about the APC, waivers/discounts, license (CC BY vs CC BY-NC), or funder compliance | `pnasnexus-openaccess` |
| No Significance Statement, or it is outside 50–120 words / just restates the abstract | `pnasnexus-significance` |
| Abstract too long/narrow, has headings, or conflated with the significance statement | `pnasnexus-abstract` |
| Unsure of article type; structure unclear; Methods misplaced; over the page budget; no classification | `pnasnexus-writing` |
| Figures/tables over the graphical-element budget; sizing/fonts/colors non-compliant | `pnasnexus-figures` |
| Stats under-reported; n/error bars/tests unclear; not reproducible; considering a Registered Report | `pnasnexus-statistics` |
| No data/code deposition plan; raw images not retained; "on request" only | `pnasnexus-data` |
| References messy/inconsistent (note: format-neutral *at submission*) | `pnasnexus-citation` |
| About to submit; need a preflight checklist + cover letter | `pnasnexus-submission` |
| Received reviews / a revision decision | `pnasnexus-rebuttal` |
## Default order
1. `pnasnexus-fit` — clear the broad-significance bar; confirm PNAS Nexus is the venue (incl. the PNAS transfer call)
2. `pnasnexus-openaccess` — APC, waiver/discount eligibility, license choice (do this early; it gates submission)
3. `pnasnexus-writing` — article type, structure, classification, in-text Methods, page budget
4. `pnasnexus-figures` — finalize display items within the graphical-element budget
5. `pnasnexus-statistics` — rigor & reproducibility (and whether a Registered Report fits)
6. `pnasnexus-data` — mandatory data/code deposition + raw-image retention
7. `pnasnexus-significance` — the 50–120-word Significance Statement (high-value; draft early)
8. `pnasnexus-abstract` — ≤250-word single-paragraph abstract (late polish)
9. `pnasnexus-citation` — references (format-neutral at submission; make them clean and consistent)
10. `pnasnexus-submission` — preflight + cover letter
11. `pnasnexus-rebuttal` — after review
> `pnasnexus-significance`, `pnasnexus-abstract`, and `pnasnexus-citation` are **late-stage polish** — but the Significance Statement is high-value and editor-facing, so draft it as soon as the claim is locked.
## Manuscript state ledger
Keep one ledger per manuscript and update it after every routing decision. The two early gates
(fit and open access) are binary and block everything downstream; the rest are progress fields.
```text
PNAS NEXUS ROUTE LEDGER
manuscript: __________________ date: __________
[gate] fit verdict ........ in-scope / transfer-from-PNAS / wrong venue
[gate] APC funding ........ confirmed / waiver-discount pending / unresolved
[gate] license ............ CC BY / CC BY-NC (funder-compatible? Y/N)
article type .............. Research Report / Brief Report / Perspective /
Review / Registered Report
page budget ............... current ___ pp vs type budget (Methods in main text)
graphical elements ........ ___ used / budget for type
significance statement .... drafted (50-120 words) Y/N
abstract .................. single paragraph, <=250 words Y/N
data + code deposition .... repository chosen + raw images retained Y/N
references ................ internally consistent (style-neutral at submission)
next skill ................ pnasnexus-______
```
## Decision shortcuts
- "PNAS declined us — should we accept the PNAS Nexus transfer?" → `pnasnexus-fit`
- "How much will open access cost, and can we get a waiver?" → `pnasnexus-openaccess`
- "Which license — CC BY or CC BY-NC?" → `pnasnexus-openaccess`
- "Is a co-author who is an NAS member able to 'contribute' this paper?" → `pnasnexus-openaccess` / `pnasnexus-fit` (**no** — PNAS Nexus has no Contributed track)
- "What article type is this — Research Report, Brief Report, Perspective, Review?" → `pnasnexus-writing`
- "Where do Materials and Methods go?" → `pnasnexus-writing` (in the **main text**)
- "Do I really have to deposit the data and code?" → `pnasnexus-data` (yes — mandatory, with retraction teeth)
## How PNAS Nexus differs from flagship PNAS (do not transcribe PNAS facts here)
- **Business model:** PNAS Nexus is **fully gold open access with an APC**; flagship PNAS is hybrid. Cost, waivers, and license choice are real workflow steps here (`pnasnexus-openaccess`).
- **No submission tracks:** PNAS Nexus has **no Direct vs Contributed (NAS-member) choice** — all editor-assigned peer review. The `pnas-track` skill has **no equivalent**; its slot is taken by `pnasnexus-openaccess`.
- **Transfer route in:** sound work declined by PNAS can be **transferred** to PNAS Nexus with reviews carried over (`pnasnexus-fit`).
- **Scope & board:** broader, explicitly cross-disciplinary; the editorial board spans the NAS, NAE, and NAM.
- **Length:** **page-based** budgets and named **article types** (Research Report ≈6 pp / 12 max, Brief Report, Perspective, Review, Registered Reports) — `pnasnexus-writing`.
- **References:** **format-neutral at submission** — not the strict numbered-by-appearance PNAS demands up front (`pnasnexus-citation`).
- **Significance Statement:** **50–120 words** (note the **minimum**) (`pnasnexus-significance`).
## Anti-patterns
- **Do not** skip `pnasnexus-fit` and start polishing prose.
- **Do not** defer the open-access/APC/license decision to the final upload — it gates submission (`pnasnexus-openaccess`).
- **Do not** assume a Direct/Contributed track exists — it does not.
- **Do not** copy length, reference-style, or fee facts from the flagship `pnas-skills` pack; PNAS Nexus differs.
- **Do not** generate a rebuttal before the main text is actually revised.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!