name: Synthesize research evidence tagline: Build a source-linked evidence base for research or proposals. summary: Use ChatGPT to synthesize papers, research notes, methods documents, prior proposals, funding guidance, and grant aims into a research landscape with themes, disagreements, limitations, and claim-review flags. skills:
-
token: google-drive description: Gather the approved paper corpus, notes, methods documents, and proposal materials.
-
token: $documents description: Produce a structured evidence brief with source links and claim-review flags. bestFor:
-
Faculty preparing a literature review or grant concept.
-
Evidence collections spread across papers, notes, and prior proposals.
-
Draft claims that need traceable sources and explicit limitations. starterPrompt: title: Build a Literature or Grant Evidence Base body: >- Synthesize the papers, research notes, methods documents, prior proposals, funding guidance, grant aims, and citation requirements I provide.
Organize the evidence by:
-
theme
-
disagreement
-
methods limitation
-
relevance to each research or grant aim
-
open question
Create a research landscape or grant evidence brief with source links and claims that require faculty verification. Do not invent citations or overstate the evidence. suggestedEffort: high relatedLinks:
-
-
label: Plugins url: /codex/plugins
For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending
.mdto the page URL.
Define the evidence corpus
Collect the approved papers, notes, methods documents, prior proposal excerpts, funder guidance, draft aims, and citation requirements. Record which sources are authoritative and which are background only.
Ask ChatGPT to inventory the corpus before synthesizing it. Resolve missing files, duplicates, and inaccessible references early.
Build a traceable evidence brief
The starter prompt should produce:
- Themes and areas of agreement.
- Meaningful disagreements.
- Methods and evidence limitations.
- Evidence mapped to each research or grant aim.
- Open questions and missing support.
- Source links for every substantive claim.
Keep source findings separate from interpretation and proposal language.
Review claims and citations
Verify each citation against the original source. Check that quoted or paraphrased findings preserve scope, population, method, and uncertainty.
Use follow-up prompts to strengthen weakly supported sections, compare competing evidence, or create a claim-to-source matrix. Faculty remain responsible for interpretation, citation accuracy, and final proposal claims.