Systematic Search StrategySAFE
🔬 A curated collection of 23,000+ agent skills for empirical research across 8 social science disciplines. | 精选 23,000+ AI Agent 技能库,覆盖8大社会科学学科的实证研究。CoPaper.AI 20分钟完成一篇可复现的规范实证论文,并支持用户上传 Skills。-- Maintained by CoPaper.AI from Stanford REAP.
Overview
🔬 A curated collection of 23,000+ agent skills for empirical research across 8 social science disciplines. | 精选 23,000+ AI Agent 技能库,覆盖8大社会科学学科的实证研究。CoPaper.AI 20分钟完成一篇可复现的规范实证论文,并支持用户上传 Skills。-- Maintained by CoPaper.AI from Stanford REAP.
e1ba289846fdOBSERVED · 2026-10-08Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| openclaw | mentioned |
What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
---
name: systematic-search-strategy
description: "Construct rigorous systematic search strategies for literature reviews"
metadata:
openclaw:
emoji: "🎯"
category: "literature"
subcategory: "search"
keywords: ["search strategy", "Boolean search", "search string construction", "advanced search", "systematic review"]
source: "wentor"
---
# Systematic Search Strategy
A skill for designing and executing comprehensive, reproducible literature search strategies for systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses. Follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and Cochrane Handbook best practices.
## PICO Framework for Search Design
Structure your research question using PICO (or variants):
```
P - Population / Problem: Who or what is being studied?
I - Intervention / Exposure: What is the treatment or exposure?
C - Comparison: What is the alternative?
O - Outcome: What is being measured?
Variants:
PICOS: adds Study design
SPIDER: Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type
PCC: Population, Concept, Context (for scoping reviews)
```
### From PICO to Search Strategy
```python
def pico_to_search_blocks(pico: dict) -> dict:
"""
Convert a PICO question into search concept blocks.
Args:
pico: Dict with keys 'population', 'intervention', 'comparison', 'outcome'
Each value is a list of synonyms/related terms
Returns:
Search blocks ready for Boolean combination
"""
blocks = {}
for component, terms in pico.items():
# Expand each term with common variants
expanded = []
for term in terms:
expanded.append(f'"{term}"')
# Add truncation variants
if len(term) > 5:
expanded.append(f'{term.rstrip("s")}*') # basic stemming
blocks[component] = expanded
# Build final query: AND between blocks, OR within blocks
query_parts = []
for component, terms in blocks.items():
block = ' OR '.join(terms)
query_parts.append(f'({block})')
final_query = ' AND '.join(query_parts)
return {
'blocks': blocks,
'combined_query': final_query,
'n_concepts': len(blocks)
}
# Example: RQ: "Does mindfulness meditation reduce anxiety in college students?"
pico = {
'population': ['college students', 'university students', 'undergraduate students',
'higher education students'],
'intervention': ['mindfulness', 'mindfulness meditation', 'mindfulness-based stress reduction',
'MBSR', 'mindfulness-based cognitive therapy', 'MBCT'],
'outcome': ['anxiety', 'anxiety disorder', 'generalized anxiety', 'test anxiety',
'anxiety symptoms', 'state anxiety', 'trait anxiety']
}
result = pico_to_search_blocks(pico)
print(result['combined_query'])
```
## Database-Specific Search Syntax
### Adapting Searches Across Databases
```python
def adapt_search_for_database(base_query: str, database: str) -> str:
"""
Adapt a base search string for different database syntaxes.
"""
adaptations = {
'pubmed': {
'truncation': '*',
'phrase': '"..."',
'proximity': None, # PubMed doesn't support proximity
'field_tags': {'title': '[ti]', 'abstract': '[tiab]', 'mesh': '[MeSH]'},
'notes': 'Add MeSH terms for each concept block'
},
'web_of_science': {
'truncation': '*',
'phrase': '"..."',
'proximity': 'NEAR/N',
'field_tags': {'title': 'TI=', 'topic': 'TS=', 'author': 'AU='},
'notes': 'Use TS= for topic search (title+abstract+keywords)'
},
'scopus': {
'truncation': '*',
'phrase': '"..."',
'proximity': 'W/N',
'field_tags': {'title': 'TITLE()', 'title_abs': 'TITLE-ABS-KEY()', 'author': 'AUTH()'},
'notes': 'Use TITLE-ABS-KEY() for comprehensive searching'
},
'psycinfo': {
'truncation': '*',
'phrase': '"..."',
'proximity': 'Nn',
'field_tags': {'title': 'TI', 'abstract': 'AB', 'thesaurus': 'DE'},
'notes': 'Use DE field for PsycINFO thesaurus terms'
}
}
db = adaptations.get(database.lower(), {})
adapted = base_query # Start with base query
return {
'database': database,
'query': adapted,
'syntax_notes': db.get('notes', ''),
'truncation': db.get('truncation', '*'),
'field_tags': db.get('field_tags', {})
}
```
## Search Documentation
### PRISMA-S Reporting Checklist
Document every search completely:
```yaml
search_documentation:
date_searched: "2026-03-09"
databases:
- name: "PubMed/MEDLINE"
interface: "PubMed.gov"
date_coverage: "1966-present"
search_string: |
(("college students"[tiab] OR "university students"[tiab])
AND ("mindfulness"[tiab] OR "MBSR"[tiab])
AND ("anxiety"[tiab] OR "anxiety disorders"[MeSH]))
results_count: 342
filters_applied: "English language; 2010-2026"
- name: "Web of Science"
interface: "Clarivate"
date_coverage: "1900-present"
search_string: |
TS=("college student*" OR "university student*")
AND TS=(mindfulness OR MBSR OR MBCT)
AND TS=(anxiety)
results_count: 287
filters_applied: "Article or Review; English; 2010-2026"
grey_literature:
- "ProQuest Dissertations (N=45)"
- "Google Scholar first 200 results"
- "OpenGrey (N=12)"
- "Hand-searched reference lists of included studies"
total_before_dedup: 686
total_after_dedup: 493
deduplication_tool: "Covidence"
```
## Screening Workflow
### PRISMA Flow Diagram Data
```python
def prisma_flow(records: dict) -> str:
"""Generate PRISMA 2020 flow diagram data."""
flow = f"""
IDENTIFICATION
Records from databases: {records['from_dTrust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (0)
No findings outside the package's declared scope.
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
e1ba289846fdfull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/brycewang-stanford__systematic-search-strategy.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-08 | e1ba289846fd | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Systematic Search Strategy skill do?
🔬 A curated collection of 23,000+ agent skills for empirical research across 8 social science disciplines. | 精选 23,000+ AI Agent 技能库,覆盖8大社会科学学科的实证研究。CoPaper.AI 20分钟完成一篇可复现的规范实证论文,并支持用户上传 Skills。-- Maintained by CoPaper.AI from Stanford REAP.
Is Systematic Search Strategy safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Systematic Search Strategy access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does Systematic Search Strategy work with?
Its documentation mentions openclaw. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (e1ba289846fd), read on 2026-10-08. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.