review-clinical-ddi-study

Solid

Reviews clinical drug-interaction study reports for design adequacy, result integrity and coverage against in-vitro triggers. It records the mechanism and index drug and flags mismatches, assesses whether the design could detect the effect it sought, extracts every geometric mean ratio with its confidence interval and classifies it against magnitude bands transcribed from the guidance in force, and separates inconclusive studies from negative ones. Use it to review a dedicated interaction study, check which triggered signals received a study, or reconcile a reported ratio against a summary or label. Example: "Review a dedicated interaction study, check which triggered signals received a study." Do not use for in-vitro package review, for management strategy or label wording, for re-analysing individual data, or to judge whether an exposure change is clinically significant.

Data & Documents 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

# Clinical DDI study review ## Who this is for A clinical pharmacologist or reviewer holding one or more clinical interaction study reports and asking whether each study answers the question it was run to answer, and whether its result is being carried forward faithfully. ## When to use this skill - Reviewing a dedicated clinical DDI study report before it supports a label statement. - Checking whether the index perpetrator or victim was appropriate for the mechanism. - Assessing whether the design could detect the effect size that matters. - Reconciling a reported geometric mean ratio against what a summary or label claims. - Gap-checking which triggered in-vitro signals actually received a clinical study. ## When NOT to use this skill - **In-vitro packages and triggers** — use `review-in-vitro-ddi-package`. That skill decides which studies the programme owes; this one reviews the studies it ran. - **Management strategy and label wording** — use `review-ddi-evidence`. - **Deciding whether an exposure change matters clinically.** Refused here. - **Recomputing a ratio from individual data.** This skill reviews reported statistics against the design that produced them; it does not re-analyse. - **Modality where the framework does not apply** — for a therapeutic protein, see `contexts/modality/mab.md`. The cytokine-mediated question replaces the enzyme question, and a clean enzyme study answers neither. ## Operating modes One mode per invocation. Say which was us...

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

Code & Development Solid

review-company-core-data-sheet

Reviews the clinical pharmacology content of a Company Core Data Sheet (CCDS) — the sponsor's internal reference document that anchors all regional label variants. Checks that CP content is consistent with the authoritative evidence base, that it can support downstream regional labels (USPI, SmPC, JP PI), and that content differences between CCDS and regional labels are documented rather than silent. Use when reviewing a CCDS draft. Do not use for regional label review or for deciding what content to include.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour
Code & Development Solid

review-clinical-meaningfulness-covariate-effects

Reviews Clinical meaningfulness of covariate effects evidence pack for the L3 task «Clinical meaningfulness of covariate effects». Produces a source-linked finding register with denominators and an explicit refuse list. Use when a practitioner asks to work this topic — e.g. "Please review the materials for Clinical meaningfulness of covariate effects and produce a sourced finding register \u2014 do not decide the clinical or regulatory outcome.". Do not use to decide the outcome of clinical meaningfulness of covariate effects; approve or submit related documents; select or adjust a dose; speak for the sponsor to an agency.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour
Web & Frontend Featured

design-study

Study design and validity review for radiology and medical AI research. Identifies analysis unit, cohort logic, leakage risks, comparator design, validation strategy, and reporting guideline fit before drafting or submission.

263 Updated 2 days ago
Aperivue