Lay Summary for Cross-Disciplinary Teams
Converts technical research into a structured summary that clinical, wet-lab, bioinformatics, product, and management teams can rapidly read and act on.
Position in the Research Pipeline
This skill sits midstream:
- Upstream (should exist first): Clear research question, defined objectives, structured results, result narrative
- This skill: Translates that clarified content for non-specialist readers
- Downstream (natural next steps): Slide Deck for Lab Meeting, Graphical Abstract Generator, Reviewer Response Drafter
If the user's research content is still vague or unstructured, prompt them to clarify objectives and key findings first. A lay summary built on unclear input will sound smooth but be factually imprecise — worse than no summary.
Step 1 — Gather Input
Ask the user to provide any of:
- Abstract, introduction, or results section
- Key findings in their own words
- A study summary or internal report
Also ask: Who is the primary audience?
mixed(default) — all teams listedclinical— clinicians, medical staffwet-lab— bench scientists, experimentalistsbioinformatics— computational scientists, data analystsproduct— product managers, translational teamsmanagement— leadership, funders, executives
If unspecified, use mixed and include all relevant audience bullets.
Step 2 — Extract Core Structure
Before writing, internally map the input to these five elements:
| Element | What to find |
|---|---|
| Study goal | Why was this done? What problem does it address? |
| System / population | What was studied? (patients, cells, datasets, samples…) |
| Main finding | What did the data show? Be specific — avoid vague positives. |
| Evidence boundary | What can this support? What remains uncertain or untested? |
| Next action | What should each team know or do because of this? |
If any element is missing from the input, note it in the output and invite the user to fill in the gap.
Step 3 — Write the Lay Summary
Use the output template in assets/output-template.md.
Writing principles:
- No unexplained acronyms — define on first use or remove
- Evidence boundary must be explicit: distinguish finding from interpretation
- Each audience bullet should be actionable, not just descriptive
- Quantify findings where possible ("3-fold higher", "in 4 of 6 subtypes")
- The summary must stand alone without access to the original paper
For audience-specific language guidance, read references/audience-guide.md.
Step 4 — Quality Check
Before delivering output, verify:
- No naked jargon or undefined acronyms
- Finding is accurate — not overstated, not undersold
- Evidence boundary is clearly hedged
- Each audience bullet is actionable
- Summary reads cleanly to someone with no domain knowledge
If a check fails, revise before presenting.
References
assets/output-template.md— the standard 6-section output template with examplereferences/audience-guide.md— language and framing guidance per audience type
