Cc structured abstract
Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Cancer-Cell-Skills/skills/cc-structured-abstract
Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill cc-structured-abstractAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when writing the Cancer Cell (Cell Press) front matter — the Summary, eTOC blurb, Highlights, and graphical abstract. It crafts these short items for accuracy and impact; it does not write Results or calibrate statistics.
SKILL.md
4.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Summary, Highlights & Graphical Abstract (cc-structured-abstract)
When to trigger
- Need a Cancer Cell Summary (the abstract)
- Need Highlights (the short bullet list Cell Press requires)
- Need the eTOC blurb (one-paragraph teaser for the table of contents)
- Building or refining the graphical abstract
The Summary (abstract)
Cell Press uses a single-paragraph Summary (verify the current word limit on the author page). Structure it as a tight mechanistic arc:
- Context / gap — the cancer problem and the unknown (1 sentence).
- Approach — the systems used (cells / in vivo / human), at a high level.
- Core finding — the mechanism: what regulates what, with direction.
- Validation — that it holds in vivo and/or in patient data.
- Significance — the translational implication (vulnerability / biomarker / therapy), calibrated to the evidence.
Lead with the discovery, not the background. Name the molecule/axis and the cancer context concretely. Avoid hype words ("novel," "unprecedented") and unsupported clinical promises.
Highlights
- Provide the required number of short bullets (commonly four; verify current count), each ~85 characters.
- Each highlight is a result, not a method or aim.
- Order them as a mini-story: key mechanism → validation → translational point.
- Make them specific and declarative ("X drives Y via Z in pancreatic tumors"), not vague ("X plays a role").
eTOC blurb
- One short paragraph (a few sentences) written for a broad cancer audience.
- Third person, present tense; names the authors' key finding and why it matters.
- Often written as "Author et al. show that ..." — confirm the current style.
- No abbreviations that a non-specialist would not know.
Graphical abstract
- One panel that conveys the mechanism and its consequence at a glance.
- Show the axis (input → node → output) and the tumor context; minimal text.
- Must match the paper's actual claims — no implied results beyond the data.
- Build in BioRender/Illustrator at required resolution; legible at thumbnail size.
Checklist
- Summary leads with the discovery and names the mechanism concretely
- Summary states orthogonal validation (in vivo / human) and a calibrated significance line
- Summary within the current word limit; no hype words
- Highlights are results, specific, ordered as a story, within length
- eTOC blurb is broad-audience, present tense, accurate
- Graphical abstract shows mechanism → consequence and matches the data
- Front matter is consistent with the paper's actual claims and
n/evidence
Anti-patterns
- Background-heavy Summary that buries the finding
- Highlights that restate aims/methods or are vague
- Overclaiming therapeutic impact in the Summary or graphical abstract
- Graphical abstract implying results not shown in the paper
- eTOC blurb stuffed with jargon and abbreviations
- Inconsistent gene/protein nomenclature across front matter and text
Abstract pass for Cancer Cell
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the cancer context, mechanism, model system, validation chain, and translational boundary; then test whether the manuscript addresses cancer-biology reviewers who expect mechanistic oncology, translational relevance, and strong multi-modal validation.
- Primary move: Compress to question, design, population/object, result, limitation, and contribution; remove generic importance sentences.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next editrows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly. - Neighbor test: compare against Cell for broader biology, Nature Cancer for oncology breadth, Clinical Cancer Research for clinical translation; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.mdfor volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Summary】drafted; words = ...; leads with finding? Y/N
【Validation line】in vivo / human stated? Y/N
【Highlights】n bullets; all results? within length?
【eTOC blurb】broad-audience? accurate? Y/N
【Graphical abstract】mechanism→consequence? matches data? Y/N
【Overclaim check】hype/clinical promises removed? Y/N
【Next step】cc-ethics-registration or cc-writing-style