# Sport Geography Review Bibliometric > Use for external-literature review and evidence synthesis in geography + sport science, including systematic/scoping/critical/bibliometric reviews, PRISMA, literature matrices, paper-level extraction, Evidence Trace, cross-paper synthesis, conflicting evidence, heterogeneity synthesis, review gaps, and Paragraph-level Synthesis Contracts. - Skill: `lzy599775/sport-geography-review-bibliometric` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 16 files) - Install (CLI): `npx get-skill add lzy599775/sport-geography-review-bibliometric` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/lzy599775/sport-geography-review-bibliometric/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Research & Search - Author: Lzy599775 (https://skillmd.com/u/lzy599775) - Updated: 2026-11-14 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/lzy599775/sport-geography-review-bibliometric --- # Sport Geography Review Bibliometric This skill supports systematic reviews, scoping reviews, critical reviews, and bibliometric/scientometric manuscripts in sport geography and urban health geography. It owns literature-evidence synthesis before manuscript prose: corpus construction, paper-level extraction, Evidence Trace, cross-paper argument mapping, and review synthesis QC. It is designed for work that combines sports facilities, parks, green/heat exposure, accessibility, equity, spatial justice, and planning implications. Use it to move from a broad topic and paper corpus to a journal-positioned review manuscript with reproducible search logic, defensible coding, meaningful bibliometric maps, and a policy agenda. ## Core Contract Do not treat bibliometrics as the contribution. The contribution must be one of: - a clarified concept boundary; - a systematic evidence map; - a method evolution framework; - a justice/equity coding framework; - a journal-fit planning or policy agenda; - a combined review + bibliometric route that explains why the field matters. Default argument chain: `public health and active living pressure -> unequal spatial opportunity -> exposure/accessibility measurement gap -> evidence synthesis -> method and justice framework -> planning agenda` ## Fast Workflow 1. **Position the manuscript** - Decide whether the paper is a systematic review, scoping review, bibliometric review, or hybrid review. - Choose one target route: SCS/Cities, landscape-green-space journals, health-exposure journals, or broader geography/planning journals. - Read `references/00_skill_design_principles.md` when updating the skill itself. - Read `references/01_positioning_and_journal_route.md`. 2. **Define scope and search logic** - Separate object terms, exposure/accessibility terms, equity/justice terms, health/activity terms, and exclusions. - Use WoS + Scopus by default for bibliometrics; add PubMed/SPORTDiscus/Dimensions only when the research question needs health or sport coverage. - Read `references/02_search_prisma_protocol.md`. 3. **Build the evidence corpus** - Document search date, database, query, filters, de-duplication, and screening reasons. - Keep OA/non-OA status, DOI, journal, partition label, and manual-download status separate from inclusion decisions. - Use `assets/PRISMA筛选记录模板.xlsx` and `assets/文献批判性编码模板.xlsx`. - Record paper-level findings in the Evidence Trace with a full-text status and source locator. `ABSTRACT_ONLY` records must not receive invented section, page, table, figure, or supplement locations. 4. **Run bibliometric analysis only after scope is stable** - Use bibliometrix for performance analysis and thematic evolution. - Use VOSviewer for co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, citation/co-citation, and overlay maps. - Use CiteSpace for burst references, timeline clusters, and turning points. - Read `references/03_bibliometric_workflow.md`. 5. **Add critical manual coding** - Code facility type, exposure metric, spatial scale, method family, population group, justice dimension, health pathway, and planning implication. - Use coding to answer what bibliometrics cannot answer. - Read `references/04_critical_coding_framework.md`. 6. **Synthesize across papers before drafting** - Build the Cross-paper Argument Map from Evidence IDs, preserving supporting and contradictory evidence and recording methodological, population, exposure/concept, spatial-scale, and temporal heterogeneity. - Create a paragraph synthesis contract before drafting Results, Discussion, or review Introduction paragraphs that make factual or synthesis claims. - Do not use citation count, paper count, semantic similarity, bibliometric co-occurrence, RF/SHAP output, or feature importance as evidence strength or causal mechanism. 7. **Draft the manuscript** - Make the review argument-led, not article-by-article. - Use bibliometric figures as evidence for field evolution, not decoration. - Translate findings into planning, governance, and equity implications. - Read `references/05_manuscript_structure.md` and `references/06_figures_tables_policy_agenda.md`. - For reusable writing prompts, prompt chains, reviewer audits, and policy-agenda prompts, read `references/09_prompt_library.md`. - For target-journal review and bibliometric paper patterns, read `references/10_top_journal_review_patterns.md`. 8. **Audit before completion** - Verify every citation and DOI used in the manuscript. - Check whether journal partition labels are current using the user's institution access to JCR/CAS. - Make sure the final narrative does not overclaim health benefit from exposure or accessibility. - Read `references/07_quality_checks.md`. For end-to-end projects, this skill owns literature-search reproducibility, screening, high-impact paper classification, paper-level extraction, literature matrix, Evidence Trace, Cross-paper Argument Map, evidence gap taxonomy, PRISMA records, bibliometric figures, critical coding, and review synthesis QC. Handoff stable synthesis claims and boundaries to `agent-auto-sci-methodology` and `agent-auto-sci-scicomm`; those skills do not reconstruct evidence from prose memory. ## Local Corpus When available, use the user's curated local corpus as evidence: - `/00_表格与清单/中文分类整理总表_含PDF匹配与下一步路线.xlsx` - `/02_PDF文本提取与匹配索引/全文结构索引_48篇.csv` - `/03_下一步精读与Skill建设路线.md` - `/02_PDF文本提取与匹配索引/prompt手册_提取文本.txt` Read `references/08_local_corpus_guide.md` before using these files. ## Scripts - `scripts/create_review_templates.py`: create PRISMA, critical coding, Claim-Evidence Map, Evidence Trace, Cross-paper Argument Map, paragraph synthesis contract, and journal-positioning templates in a chosen output directory. - `scripts/validate_review_templates.py`: deterministically validate workbook sheets, headers, duplicate columns, reopenability, and controlled-vocabulary bindings without judging scientific evidence. - `scripts/audit_review_library.py`: audit a local review library folder for expected tables, PDFs, extracted text, and DOI-match counts. ## Must Not Do - Do not use "sports park exposure" as the only topic if the corpus is actually green/open/sport space equity. - Do not equate accessibility with actual use. - Do not equate exposure with health benefit. - Do not equate equality with equity or justice. - Do not rely only on VOSviewer/CiteSpace screenshots for high-impact journals. - Do not present JCR/CAS partition labels as confirmed unless the user has verified them from a current official source. - Do not write a review as one-paper-at-a-time summaries; synthesize by concept, method, population, and planning implication.