prepare-dose-justification-evidence

Solid

Assembles and organises the evidence behind a registration or dose-optimisation dose justification — exposure-response integration, intrinsic and extrinsic factor coverage, formulation-bridging logic, dose-modification rules — arranged against the questions clinical pharmacology reviewers ask, with every claim carrying a locator and every gap named. Use this skill when someone asks to assemble, index, organise or gap-check the evidence supporting a proposed dose or regimen — for example "pull together what supports the 200 mg dose", "map our dose-modification rules to their evidence", or "which intrinsic factors are uncovered before we file". Do not use for first-in-human starting-dose review, for assessing a development plan for study gaps, or for any request to select, recommend, adjust or justify a dose — that decision belongs to a qualified human and this skill never makes it.

Code & Development 6 stars 0 forks Updated 6 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 84/100

Stars 20%
28
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Dose Justification Evidence Assemble everything that stands behind a proposed dose or regimen — the exposure-response analyses, the intrinsic and extrinsic factor coverage, the formulation-bridging chain, the dose-modification rules — into an indexed evidence package in which every claim carries its locator and every gap is named. Organised against the shape of question a clinical pharmacology reviewer asks, so the weak points surface before an agency finds them. ## The risk veto — read this first The research scoring for this skill recorded a **risk veto at 62.5**: its output sits one step from a registration-dose decision. That proximity is the whole reason the boundary below is structural rather than advisory. **This skill assembles and organises evidence. It never selects, recommends, adjusts or justifies a dose, and it never states that the evidence supports the proposed one.** Humans own the dose call — that is not a hedge, it is the condition under which this skill was allowed to ship at all. What that means in practice: | The skill does | The skill does not | |---|---| | Index each claim to the artefact and locator that carries it | Say whether the claim is true | | Report what an exposure-response analysis states | Say whether E-R supports the proposed dose | | Tabulate which factors are covered and which are not | Say whether the coverage is sufficient to file | | Preserve both sides of a contradiction | Decide which side is right | | Flag a dose-modificatio...

Details

Author
malekokour
Repository
malekokour/clinpharm-pmx-skills
Created
1 weeks ago
Last Updated
6 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Solid

prepare-position-defence-brief

Structures a clinical pharmacology position defence brief — the evidence-backed argument for a CP position the team expects to defend before an agency. Maps the position statement to its evidence chain, identifies vulnerabilities, and assembles counter-arguments with sourced data. Use when preparing a CP position for agency discussion. Do not use for drafting the position itself, for deciding the position, or for predicting what an agency will accept.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour
Code & Development Solid

assess-development-plan-gaps

Assesses a clinical pharmacology development plan against guidance-anchored evidence expectations, classifying every expected element as present, triggered, waivable-with-rationale, or a residual gap, each traced to the criterion that creates the obligation. Use this skill when someone asks what clinical pharmacology evidence a programme is still missing, whether a plan covers what a reviewer will expect, or which studies the drug's own properties have made obligatory — for example "what CP work are we still missing before the pre-NDA meeting" or "does this plan cover the renal and hepatic expectations". Do not use for reviewing one interaction package, for assembling agency-facing briefing content, or for any request to decide whether a gap is acceptable, to commit to a study, or to approve a plan.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour
Code & Development Solid

prepare-safety-committee-exposure-input

Prepares the exposure contribution to a safety signal review - whether an event tracks exposure, and what the available data could have shown either way. It justifies the exposure metric against the event mechanism rather than defaulting, counts affected subjects lacking PK data and states the bias direction since those cases are usually the sickest, reports stratum event counts before any rate because a rising percentage across two three and four events is not a relationship, and reports the observed exposure range alongside any negative finding so no relationship observed is distinguished from could not have observed one. Use it for a signal review or periodic safety discussion. Example: "Please a signal review or periodic safety discussion." Do not use for escalation decision packs, for submission exposure-safety sections, for nonclinical margins, for committee documentation, or to judge causality or recommend a dose change.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour