Source: https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills
Translational Gap Analyzer
ID: 209
When to Use
- Use this skill when the task needs Assess translational gaps between preclinical models and human diseases.
- Use this skill for evidence insight tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format.
- Use this skill when you need a documented fallback path for missing inputs, execution errors, or partial evidence.
Key Features
- Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assess translational gaps between preclinical models and human diseases.
- Packaged executable path(s):
scripts/main.py.
- Reference material available in
references/ for task-specific guidance.
- Structured execution path designed to keep outputs consistent and reviewable.
Dependencies
- Python 3.8+
- Built-in libraries: argparse, json, sys
Example Usage
See ## Usage above for related details.
cd "20260318/scientific-skills/Evidence Insight/translational-gap-analyzer"
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
Example run plan:
- Confirm the user input, output path, and any required config values.
- Edit the in-file
CONFIG block or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings.
- Run
python scripts/main.py with the validated inputs.
- Review the generated output and return the final artifact with any assumptions called out.
Implementation Details
See ## Workflow above for related details.
- Execution model: validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable.
- Input controls: confirm the source files, scope limits, output format, and acceptance criteria before running any script.
- Primary implementation surface:
scripts/main.py.
- Reference guidance:
references/ contains supporting rules, prompts, or checklists.
- Parameters to clarify first: input path, output path, scope filters, thresholds, and any domain-specific constraints.
- Output discipline: keep results reproducible, identify assumptions explicitly, and avoid undocumented side effects.
Quick Check
Use this command to verify that the packaged script entry point can be parsed before deeper execution.
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
Audit-Ready Commands
Use these concrete commands for validation. They are intentionally self-contained and avoid placeholder paths.
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
Workflow
- Confirm the user objective, required inputs, and non-negotiable constraints before doing detailed work.
- Validate that the request matches the documented scope and stop early if the task would require unsupported assumptions.
- Use the packaged script path or the documented reasoning path with only the inputs that are actually available.
- Return a structured result that separates assumptions, deliverables, risks, and unresolved items.
- If execution fails or inputs are incomplete, switch to the fallback path and state exactly what blocked full completion.
Description
Assesses the "translational gap" between basic research models (such as mice, zebrafish, cell lines) and human diseases, providing early warning of clinical translation failure risks. This system helps researchers identify potential translational barriers in preclinical research and improve clinical trial success rates through multi-dimensional analysis.
Capabilities
- Evaluates anatomical/physiological differences between models and humans
- Analyzes pathological similarity of disease models
- Identifies interspecies differences in molecular pathways
- Evaluates pharmacokinetic differences
- Provides early warning of clinical trial failure risk factors
- Provides improvement recommendations to increase translation success rates
Usage
# Full assessment report
python scripts/main.py --model <model_type> --disease <disease_name> --full
# Quick risk assessment
python scripts/main.py --model <model_type> --disease <disease_name> --quick
# Compare multiple models
python scripts/main.py --models mouse,rat,primate --disease <disease_name> --compare
# Specify focus areas
python scripts/main.py --model mouse --disease "Alzheimer's" --focus metabolism,immune
Arguments
| Argument |
Description |
Required |
--model |
Model type (mouse, rat, zebrafish, cell_line, organoid, primate) |
Yes (unless --models) |
--models |
Multi-model comparison mode, comma-separated |
No |
--disease |
Disease name or MeSH ID |
Yes |
--focus |
Focus areas, comma-separated (anatomy, physiology, metabolism, immune, genetics, behavior) |
No |
--full |
Generate full assessment report |
No |
--quick |
Quick risk assessment mode |
No |
--compare |
Multi-model comparison mode |
No |
--output |
Output file path |
No |
--format |
Output format (json, markdown, table) |
No |
Example Output
{
"model": "mouse",
"disease": "Alzheimer's Disease",
"overall_gap_score": 6.8,
"risk_level": "HIGH",
"dimensions": {
"genetics": {"score": 8.5, "concerns": ["APOE4 differences", "Different tau pathology patterns"]},
"physiology": {"score": 7.0, "concerns": ["Brain structure differences", "Lifespan differences"]},
"metabolism": {"score": 6.5, "concerns": ["Significant drug metabolism differences"]},
"immune": {"score": 5.5, "concerns": ["Microglia functional differences", "Different neuroinflammation patterns"]},
"behavior": {"score": 6.0, "concerns": ["Limitations in cognitive assessment methods"]}
},
"clinical_failure_predictors": [
"Immune-related mechanism research may not translate",
"Drug clearance rate differences may lead to inappropriate dosing"
],
"recommendations": [
"Consider using humanized mouse models",
"Add non-human primate validation experiments",
"Focus on peripheral immune and central immune interactions"
]
}
Model Types
Common Models
| Model |
Applicable Scenarios |
Typical Gaps |
| mouse |
Genetic manipulation, basic research |
Immune, metabolism, brain structure |
| rat |
Behavioral studies, cardiovascular |
Cognition, drug metabolism |
| zebrafish |
Development, high-throughput screening |
Anatomy, physiology |
| cell_line |
Molecular mechanisms |
Microenvironment, systemic |
| organoid |
Human-specific research |
Maturity, vascularization |
| primate |
Preclinical validation |
Cost, ethics |
Gap Scoring System
- 0-3: Low gap, good translation prospects
- 4-6: Moderate gap, requires additional validation
- 7-8: High gap, significant translation risks exist
- 9-10: Extremely high gap, low translation likelihood
Files
SKILL.md - This file
scripts/main.py - Main analysis script
Risk Assessment
| Risk Indicator |
Assessment |
Level |
| Code Execution |
Python/R scripts executed locally |
Medium |
| Network Access |
No external API calls |
Low |
| File System Access |
Read input files, write output files |
Medium |
| Instruction Tampering |
Standard prompt guidelines |
Low |
| Data Exposure |
Output files saved to workspace |
Low |
Security Checklist
Prerequisites
# Python dependencies
pip install -r requirements.txt
Evaluation Criteria
Success Metrics
Test Cases
- Basic Functionality: Standard input → Expected output
- Edge Case: Invalid input → Graceful error handling
- Performance: Large dataset → Acceptable processing time
Lifecycle Status
- Current Stage: Draft
- Next Review Date: 2026-03-06
- Known Issues: None
- Planned Improvements:
- Performance optimization
- Additional feature support
Output Requirements
Every final response should make these items explicit when they are relevant:
- Objective or requested deliverable
- Inputs used and assumptions introduced
- Workflow or decision path
- Core result, recommendation, or artifact
- Constraints, risks, caveats, or validation needs
- Unresolved items and next-step checks
Error Handling
- If required inputs are missing, state exactly which fields are missing and request only the minimum additional information.
- If the task goes outside the documented scope, stop instead of guessing or silently widening the assignment.
- If
scripts/main.py fails, report the failure point, summarize what still can be completed safely, and provide a manual fallback.
- Do not fabricate files, citations, data, search results, or execution outcomes.
Input Validation
This skill accepts requests that match the documented purpose of translational-gap-analyzer and include enough context to complete the workflow safely.
Do not continue the workflow when the request is out of scope, missing a critical input, or would require unsupported assumptions. Instead respond:
translational-gap-analyzer only handles its documented workflow. Please provide the missing required inputs or switch to a more suitable skill.
References
- references/audit-reference.md - Supported scope, audit commands, and fallback boundaries
Response Template
Use the following fixed structure for non-trivial requests:
- Objective
- Inputs Received
- Assumptions
- Workflow
- Deliverable
- Risks and Limits
- Next Checks
If the request is simple, you may compress the structure, but still keep assumptions and limits explicit when they affect correctness.
1---2name: translational-gap-analyzer3description: Assess translational gaps between preclinical models and human diseases.4license: MIT5---6> **Source**: [https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills](https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills)
7
8# Translational Gap Analyzer
9
10**ID**: 209
11
12## When to Use
13
14- Use this skill when the task needs Assess translational gaps between preclinical models and human diseases.
15- Use this skill for evidence insight tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format.
16- Use this skill when you need a documented fallback path for missing inputs, execution errors, or partial evidence.
17
18## Key Features
19
20- Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assess translational gaps between preclinical models and human diseases.
21- Packaged executable path(s): `scripts/main.py`.
22- Reference material available in `references/` for task-specific guidance.
23- Structured execution path designed to keep outputs consistent and reviewable.
24
25## Dependencies
26
27- Python 3.8+
28- Built-in libraries: argparse, json, sys
29
30## Example Usage
31
32See `## Usage` above for related details.
33
34```bash
35cd "20260318/scientific-skills/Evidence Insight/translational-gap-analyzer"
36python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
37python scripts/main.py --help
38```
39
40Example run plan:
411. Confirm the user input, output path, and any required config values.
422. Edit the in-file `CONFIG` block or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings.
433. Run `python scripts/main.py` with the validated inputs.
444. Review the generated output and return the final artifact with any assumptions called out.
45
46## Implementation Details
47
48See `## Workflow` above for related details.
49
50- Execution model: validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable.
51- Input controls: confirm the source files, scope limits, output format, and acceptance criteria before running any script.
52- Primary implementation surface: `scripts/main.py`.
53- Reference guidance: `references/` contains supporting rules, prompts, or checklists.
54- Parameters to clarify first: input path, output path, scope filters, thresholds, and any domain-specific constraints.
55- Output discipline: keep results reproducible, identify assumptions explicitly, and avoid undocumented side effects.
56
57## Quick Check
58
59Use this command to verify that the packaged script entry point can be parsed before deeper execution.
60
61```bash
62python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
63```
64
65## Audit-Ready Commands
66
67Use these concrete commands for validation. They are intentionally self-contained and avoid placeholder paths.
68
69```bash
70python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
71python scripts/main.py --help
72```
73
74## Workflow
75
761. Confirm the user objective, required inputs, and non-negotiable constraints before doing detailed work.
772. Validate that the request matches the documented scope and stop early if the task would require unsupported assumptions.
783. Use the packaged script path or the documented reasoning path with only the inputs that are actually available.
794. Return a structured result that separates assumptions, deliverables, risks, and unresolved items.
805. If execution fails or inputs are incomplete, switch to the fallback path and state exactly what blocked full completion.
81
82## Description
83
84Assesses the "translational gap" between basic research models (such as mice, zebrafish, cell lines) and human diseases, providing early warning of clinical translation failure risks. This system helps researchers identify potential translational barriers in preclinical research and improve clinical trial success rates through multi-dimensional analysis.
85
86## Capabilities
87
88- Evaluates anatomical/physiological differences between models and humans
89- Analyzes pathological similarity of disease models
90- Identifies interspecies differences in molecular pathways
91- Evaluates pharmacokinetic differences
92- Provides early warning of clinical trial failure risk factors
93- Provides improvement recommendations to increase translation success rates
94
95## Usage
96
97```text
98
99# Full assessment report
100python scripts/main.py --model <model_type> --disease <disease_name> --full
101
102# Quick risk assessment
103python scripts/main.py --model <model_type> --disease <disease_name> --quick
104
105# Compare multiple models
106python scripts/main.py --models mouse,rat,primate --disease <disease_name> --compare
107
108# Specify focus areas
109python scripts/main.py --model mouse --disease "Alzheimer's" --focus metabolism,immune
110```
111
112## Arguments
113
114| Argument | Description | Required |
115|----------|-------------|----------|
116| `--model` | Model type (mouse, rat, zebrafish, cell_line, organoid, primate) | Yes (unless --models) |
117| `--models` | Multi-model comparison mode, comma-separated | No |
118| `--disease` | Disease name or MeSH ID | Yes |
119| `--focus` | Focus areas, comma-separated (anatomy, physiology, metabolism, immune, genetics, behavior) | No |
120| `--full` | Generate full assessment report | No |
121| `--quick` | Quick risk assessment mode | No |
122| `--compare` | Multi-model comparison mode | No |
123| `--output` | Output file path | No |
124| `--format` | Output format (json, markdown, table) | No |
125
126## Example Output
127
128```json
129{
130 "model": "mouse",
131 "disease": "Alzheimer's Disease",
132 "overall_gap_score": 6.8,
133 "risk_level": "HIGH",
134 "dimensions": {
135 "genetics": {"score": 8.5, "concerns": ["APOE4 differences", "Different tau pathology patterns"]},
136 "physiology": {"score": 7.0, "concerns": ["Brain structure differences", "Lifespan differences"]},
137 "metabolism": {"score": 6.5, "concerns": ["Significant drug metabolism differences"]},
138 "immune": {"score": 5.5, "concerns": ["Microglia functional differences", "Different neuroinflammation patterns"]},
139 "behavior": {"score": 6.0, "concerns": ["Limitations in cognitive assessment methods"]}
140 },
141 "clinical_failure_predictors": [
142 "Immune-related mechanism research may not translate",
143 "Drug clearance rate differences may lead to inappropriate dosing"
144 ],
145 "recommendations": [
146 "Consider using humanized mouse models",
147 "Add non-human primate validation experiments",
148 "Focus on peripheral immune and central immune interactions"
149 ]
150}
151```
152
153## Model Types
154
155### Common Models
156
157| Model | Applicable Scenarios | Typical Gaps |
158|------|----------|----------|
159| mouse | Genetic manipulation, basic research | Immune, metabolism, brain structure |
160| rat | Behavioral studies, cardiovascular | Cognition, drug metabolism |
161| zebrafish | Development, high-throughput screening | Anatomy, physiology |
162| cell_line | Molecular mechanisms | Microenvironment, systemic |
163| organoid | Human-specific research | Maturity, vascularization |
164| primate | Preclinical validation | Cost, ethics |
165
166## Gap Scoring System
167
168- **0-3**: Low gap, good translation prospects
169- **4-6**: Moderate gap, requires additional validation
170- **7-8**: High gap, significant translation risks exist
171- **9-10**: Extremely high gap, low translation likelihood
172
173## Files
174
175- `SKILL.md` - This file
176- `scripts/main.py` - Main analysis script
177
178## Risk Assessment
179
180| Risk Indicator | Assessment | Level |
181|----------------|------------|-------|
182| Code Execution | Python/R scripts executed locally | Medium |
183| Network Access | No external API calls | Low |
184| File System Access | Read input files, write output files | Medium |
185| Instruction Tampering | Standard prompt guidelines | Low |
186| Data Exposure | Output files saved to workspace | Low |
187
188## Security Checklist
189
190- [ ] No hardcoded credentials or API keys
191- [ ] No unauthorized file system access (../)
192- [ ] Output does not expose sensitive information
193- [ ] Prompt injection protections in place
194- [ ] Input file paths validated (no ../ traversal)
195- [ ] Output directory restricted to workspace
196- [ ] Script execution in sandboxed environment
197- [ ] Error messages sanitized (no stack traces exposed)
198- [ ] Dependencies audited
199
200## Prerequisites
201
202```text
203
204# Python dependencies
205pip install -r requirements.txt
206```
207
208## Evaluation Criteria
209
210### Success Metrics
211- [ ] Successfully executes main functionality
212- [ ] Output meets quality standards
213- [ ] Handles edge cases gracefully
214- [ ] Performance is acceptable
215
216### Test Cases
2171. **Basic Functionality**: Standard input → Expected output
2182. **Edge Case**: Invalid input → Graceful error handling
2193. **Performance**: Large dataset → Acceptable processing time
220
221## Lifecycle Status
222
223- **Current Stage**: Draft
224- **Next Review Date**: 2026-03-06
225- **Known Issues**: None
226- **Planned Improvements**:
227 - Performance optimization
228 - Additional feature support
229
230## Output Requirements
231
232Every final response should make these items explicit when they are relevant:
233
234- Objective or requested deliverable
235- Inputs used and assumptions introduced
236- Workflow or decision path
237- Core result, recommendation, or artifact
238- Constraints, risks, caveats, or validation needs
239- Unresolved items and next-step checks
240
241## Error Handling
242
243- If required inputs are missing, state exactly which fields are missing and request only the minimum additional information.
244- If the task goes outside the documented scope, stop instead of guessing or silently widening the assignment.
245- If `scripts/main.py` fails, report the failure point, summarize what still can be completed safely, and provide a manual fallback.
246- Do not fabricate files, citations, data, search results, or execution outcomes.
247
248## Input Validation
249
250This skill accepts requests that match the documented purpose of `translational-gap-analyzer` and include enough context to complete the workflow safely.
251
252Do not continue the workflow when the request is out of scope, missing a critical input, or would require unsupported assumptions. Instead respond:
253
254> `translational-gap-analyzer` only handles its documented workflow. Please provide the missing required inputs or switch to a more suitable skill.
255
256## References
257
258- [references/audit-reference.md](references/audit-reference.md) - Supported scope, audit commands, and fallback boundaries
259
260## Response Template
261
262Use the following fixed structure for non-trivial requests:
263
2641. Objective
2652. Inputs Received
2663. Assumptions
2674. Workflow
2685. Deliverable
2696. Risks and Limits
2707. Next Checks
271
272If the request is simple, you may compress the structure, but still keep assumptions and limits explicit when they affect correctness.