Jama reporting standards
Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/JAMA-Skills/skills/jama-reporting-standards
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 jama-reporting-standardsAssembled 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 selecting and completing the EQUATOR-network reporting checklist and flow diagram for a JAMA manuscript (CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, STARD, and design-specific guidelines). Maps design to checklist; it does NOT design the study or write the statistics.
SKILL.md
7.0 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Reporting Standards (jama-reporting-standards)
When to trigger
- You know the design and need the matching EQUATOR checklist
- A flow diagram is missing (participant flow for RCTs, study selection for reviews)
- You are unsure which guideline applies (CONSORT vs STROBE vs PRISMA vs STARD)
- Preparing the checklist file required at submission
Design → guideline map
| Design | EQUATOR guideline | Mandatory diagram |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized clinical trial | CONSORT | CONSORT participant-flow diagram |
| Observational (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional) | STROBE | Participant-flow diagram strongly expected |
| Systematic review ± meta-analysis | PRISMA | PRISMA study-selection flow diagram |
| Diagnostic-accuracy study | STARD | STARD participant-flow diagram |
| Study protocol | SPIRIT | Schedule of enrollment/assessments |
| Prediction model | TRIPOD | — |
| Quality-improvement study | SQUIRE | — |
| Other designs | The matching EQUATOR guideline | per guideline |
Always check the EQUATOR Network and JAMA's Instructions for Authors for the current guideline list and any JAMA-specific extensions or required checklist file.
What each core guideline forces you to report
CONSORT (RCTs)
- Title states "randomized"; structured abstract follows CONSORT-for-abstracts
- Trial design, allocation ratio, eligibility, settings; any changes after start
- Randomization (sequence, concealment, implementation) and blinding
- Numbers randomized, received intervention, analyzed, and lost — in the flow diagram
- Primary/secondary outcomes with estimated effect size and precision (CI)
- Harms, registration number, protocol availability, funding
STROBE (observational)
- Study design stated early; setting, eligibility, sources, follow-up
- All variables (outcomes, exposures, confounders, effect modifiers) defined
- Bias mitigation, sample-size logic, statistical methods incl. confounding
- Numbers at each stage, descriptive data, and unadjusted and adjusted estimates
PRISMA (systematic reviews / meta-analyses)
- Protocol/registration; explicit eligibility and information sources
- Full reproducible search strategy; selection and data-extraction process
- Risk-of-bias methods; synthesis methods; the study-selection flow diagram
- Certainty-of-evidence assessment (e.g., GRADE)
STARD (diagnostic accuracy)
- Index test and reference standard with rationale and thresholds
- Participant flow and timing; cross-tabulation of results vs reference
- Estimates of accuracy with CIs; handling of indeterminate results
Checklist
- Correct guideline chosen for the design
- Completed checklist file prepared with page/line numbers for each item
- Required flow diagram drafted (CONSORT / PRISMA / STARD / STROBE)
- Title and abstract conform to the abstract-level extension where one exists
- Registration number and protocol availability reported where required
- Adjusted and unadjusted estimates both reported (observational)
- Certainty-of-evidence / risk-of-bias reported (reviews, observational)
Anti-patterns
- Submitting an RCT with no CONSORT flow diagram
- A systematic review with no PRISMA diagram or no reproducible search
- Filling the checklist with page numbers that do not match the text
- Picking STROBE for a randomized trial (or CONSORT for a cohort)
- Reporting only adjusted estimates in an observational study
- Ignoring the abstract-level extension (e.g., CONSORT-for-abstracts)
Worked example: matching design to checklist (illustrative)
Vignette (illustrative): a multicenter randomized clinical trial, N = 2,800 adults with sepsis, primary outcome 90-day mortality, absolute risk difference -3.1 percentage points (95% CI, -5.8 to -0.4). At the Journal of the American Medical Association this maps to CONSORT with a mandatory participant-flow diagram accounting for everyone screened, randomized, and analyzed; the completed CONSORT checklist must carry page/line locations, the title must state "randomized," and the abstract follows CONSORT-for-abstracts. Had the same question been answered by a cohort, the map would shift to STROBE with both unadjusted and adjusted estimates; a systematic review would shift to PRISMA with a study-selection diagram and a GRADE certainty assessment.
Reviewer pushback and the JAMA fix
- "Reporting incomplete (CONSORT/PRISMA item X)." Fix: add the item and update the checklist's page/line location to match the revised text.
- "Picked STROBE for a randomized trial." Fix: re-map to CONSORT; the design, not convenience, fixes the guideline.
- "Only adjusted estimates reported (observational)." Fix: report unadjusted and adjusted estimates per STROBE.
Calibration anchors (hedge where uncertain): the design-to-guideline mapping and the mandatory flow diagram for RCTs and reviews are durable; JAMA-specific extensions and required checklist files evolve — confirm against the EQUATOR Network and current author guidelines.
Reporting pass for JAMA
Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the clinical question, patient population, estimand or endpoint, safety/ethics issue, and reporting checklist; then test whether the manuscript addresses clinical reviewers who ask whether the evidence changes patient care, policy, or medical decision-making while satisfying reporting standards.
- Primary move: Tie every reporting checklist item to a manuscript location; missing registration, denominator, consent, data, or code statements must be explicit blockers.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next editrows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly. - Sibling comparison: compare against NEJM for field-changing clinical medicine, Lancet for global-health breadth, specialty journals for narrower clinical domains; 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
【Design】...
【Guideline】CONSORT / STROBE / PRISMA / STARD / other
【Flow diagram drafted】yes / no
【Checklist file complete with locations】yes / no
【Items still unreported】...
【Next skill】jama-statistics