From review-of-educational-research-skills
Makes systematic reviews for RER auditable and re-runnable by enforcing PRISMA/MARS reporting, coding reliability quantification, and open materials sharing.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/review-of-educational-research-skills:revedres-transparency-and-reproducibilityThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- The analysis is done and you must make the review auditable and re-runnable
Because RER reviews are submitted and peer-reviewed (not invited), a reader cannot take the synthesis on the author's authority — they must be able to check it. The credibility of a systematic review or meta-analysis is exactly the credibility of its process documentation: the search, the screening, the coding, and the analysis must be reported so completely that an independent reader could, in principle, re-run them and land in the same place. This is not an appendix afterthought; it is the spine of the review's claim to be systematic.
RER directs authors of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to specific reporting standards (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准):
revedres-tables-figures).revedres-proposal-and-commissioning); PROSPERO/OSF registration cited.metafor/meta, Stata meta, or Python) so the pooled estimates, moderators, and bias diagnostics are reproducible from the shared data.【PRISMA】checklist + flow complete? Y/N
【MARS/JARS】meta-analysis reporting standards walked? Y/N
【Registration】PROSPERO/OSF cited; deviations flagged? Y/N
【Coder reliability】κ/ICC value reported = <value>; conflict resolution stated? Y/N
【Codebook】included? Y/N
【Search artifacts】strings + dates + screening counts reported in full? Y/N
【Open materials】dataset + code shared (DOI)? Y/N
【Preregistered vs exploratory】distinguished? Y/N
【Next step】→ revedres-editor-strategy (scope negotiation + reviewer expectations)
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin review-of-educational-research-skillsDocuments literature search and makes embedded meta-analyses reproducible for ARPsych reviews. Includes PRISMA flow, coding protocols, effect-size datasets, and analysis code.
Documents a sociology review's search/selection record and reproducibility plan. Builds a near-PRISMA coverage account for transparency without primary data.
Helps meet transparency and reproducibility obligations for a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) piece, including data deposit, protocol preregistration, and disclosure.