cardiology-trial-editorial

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Cardiology Trial Editorial Writer

心脏病学试验社论撰写工具

Build thought leadership through evidence-based editorials on landmark cardiology trials, written in Eric Topol's authoritative Ground Truths style.

以Eric Topol权威的Ground Truths风格，撰写关于具有里程碑意义的心脏病学试验的循证社论，打造思想领导力。

Core Workflow

核心工作流

Phase 1: Trial Discovery & Selection

第一阶段：试验发掘与筛选

Search target journals using PubMed:search_articles for recent publications (past 30-90 days):
- NEJM, JAMA, Lancet (tier 1 general)
- JACC, JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, European Heart Journal (tier 1 cardiology)
- Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, EuroIntervention, JSCAI, CCI (interventional focus)
Score each trial using the importance scoring system (see
```
references/trial-scoring.md
```
):
- Extract metadata: design, sample size, endpoints, topic, novelty
- Calculate base score from design + sample + endpoints + topic + novelty
- Add venue bonus for top journals
- Optionally assess practice-change likelihood
- Sort by total importance_score
Present top candidates (top 3-5) to user with:
- Title, journal, publication date
- Importance score breakdown
- One-sentence summary of why it matters
- Ask user to select or request alternatives

使用PubMed搜索目标期刊：通过
```
PubMed:search_articles
```
检索近期发表的文献（过去30-90天）：
- NEJM、JAMA、Lancet（一级综合期刊）
- JACC、JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions、European Heart Journal（一级心脏病学期刊）
- Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions、EuroIntervention、JSCAI、CCI（介入领域重点期刊）
使用重要性评分系统对每个试验评分（详见
```
references/trial-scoring.md
```
）：
- 提取元数据：试验设计、样本量、终点指标、研究主题、创新性
- 根据试验设计+样本量+终点指标+研究主题+创新性计算基础得分
- 为顶级期刊发表的试验增加期刊加成分
- 可选评估试验改变临床实践的可能性
- 按总重要性得分排序
向用户展示排名靠前的候选试验（前3-5个），包含：
- 标题、期刊、发表日期
- 重要性得分明细
- 一句话总结其重要性
- 询问用户选择或请求其他候选试验

Phase 2: Editorial Preparation

第二阶段：社论准备

Once user approves a trial:

Determine content availability:
- Ask: "Do you have the full PDF, or should I work from the abstract?"
- If full text available via PubMed Central (PMCID), retrieve with PubMed:get_full_text_article
- If only abstract: work from PubMed:get_article_metadata
Gather contextual evidence:
- Search PubMed for prior landmark trials in same domain
- Identify 2-4 key comparator trials for context
- Extract relevant findings to position current trial
Analyze trial critically:
- Study design, population, intervention, endpoints
- Internal validity: randomization, blinding, missing data
- External validity: generalizability, exclusions, setting
- Statistical robustness: confidence intervals, subgroups

一旦用户选定某个试验：

确认内容获取渠道：
- 询问：“您是否有完整PDF，还是仅基于摘要撰写？”
- 如果PubMed Central（PMCID）可获取全文，通过
```
PubMed:get_full_text_article
```
  获取
- 如果仅能获取摘要：基于
```
PubMed:get_article_metadata
```
  提供的信息撰写
收集背景证据：
- 搜索PubMed中同一领域的既往里程碑式试验
- 确定2-4个关键对照试验用于背景对比
- 提取相关研究结果，定位当前试验的研究价值
批判性分析试验：
- 研究设计、研究人群、干预措施、终点指标
- 内部有效性：随机化、盲法、缺失数据处理
- 外部有效性：推广性、排除标准、研究场景
- 统计可靠性：置信区间、亚组分析

Phase 3: Editorial Writing

第三阶段：社论撰写

Follow the Eric Topol Ground Truths style (see

references/topol-style-guide.md

Structure (500 words, ~1500-1700 characters):

Opening hook (1-2 paragraphs):
- Start with clinical problem, not the trial
- Frame as bedside dilemma or unmet need
- Introduce trial as potential solution
Trial summary (1 tight paragraph):
- Population, intervention, comparator, design
- Primary outcome, headline effect size
- Keep numbers minimal and meaningful
Evidence quality (brief critical assessment):
- One paragraph on strengths ("why I trust this")
- One paragraph on limitations ("what makes me hesitate")
- Focus on validity and confidence, not trivia
Context and comparison:
- How this fits with prior trials
- Confirms trend, reverses evidence, or fills gap?
- Explain differences: population, endpoints, timing
Clinical implications (most important section):
- Who should change practice Monday?
- Who should wait for more data?
- Specific, actionable guidance
- Conditional but clear language
Unanswered questions:
- Important outcomes not measured
- Subgroups with unclear signals
- 1-2 concrete future research directions
Closing (one strong sentence):
- Memorable take-home message
- Balanced stance on practice change

Topol Style Elements:

Authoritative but accessible voice
Dense with scientific concepts, assume MD audience
Evidence-grounded every claim with citations
Balanced skepticism, never promotional
Numbers: absolute risk differences, NNT/NNH
Patient-centered: QOL, treatment burden, preferences

Critical Rules:

ALWAYS cite using PubMed references with DOIs
For claims about trials: cite specific PMID
Never make unsupported assertions
If working from abstract only, explicitly acknowledge limitations
Use phrases like "if confirmed in full publication" when from abstract
Maintain intellectual humility while projecting expertise

遵循Eric Topol的Ground Truths风格（详见

references/topol-style-guide.md

）：

结构（500字，约1500-1700字符）：

开篇引入（1-2段）：
- 从临床问题切入，而非直接介绍试验
- 构建临床困境或未被满足的需求场景
- 引入试验作为潜在解决方案
试验摘要（紧凑的1段）：
- 研究人群、干预措施、对照方案、试验设计
- 主要终点、核心效应量
- 尽量精简数据，保留关键信息
证据质量（简短的批判性评估）：
- 1段阐述试验优势（“为何我认可该试验”）
- 1段阐述试验局限性（“为何我持保留态度”）
- 聚焦有效性和可信度，避免无关细节
背景与对比：
- 该试验与既往研究的关联
- 是验证趋势、推翻现有证据还是填补研究空白？
- 解释差异：研究人群、终点指标、研究时机
临床意义（最重要的部分）：
- 哪些人群应立即改变临床实践？
- 哪些人群应等待更多数据？
- 具体、可执行的指导建议
- 表述需严谨但清晰
未解决的问题：
- 未被测量的重要终点
- 信号不明确的亚组
- 1-2个具体的未来研究方向
结尾（有力的一句话）：
- 令人难忘的核心结论
- 对实践改变的平衡立场

Topol风格要素：

权威且易懂的语气
内容富含科学概念，预设读者为医师
所有主张均有参考文献支持
保持平衡的怀疑态度，绝不夸大宣传
数据呈现：绝对风险差异、NNT/NNH
以患者为中心：生活质量、治疗负担、患者偏好

关键规则：

始终使用带DOI的PubMed参考文献
关于试验的主张：引用具体PMID
绝不做出无依据的断言
如果仅基于摘要撰写，需明确说明局限性
当基于摘要时，使用“若在全文发表中得到证实”等表述
在展现专业能力的同时保持学术谦逊

Phase 4: Visual Infographic Creation

第四阶段：可视化信息图制作

After writing the editorial, create an engaging visual infographic slide (see

references/infographic-design.md

Purpose: Increase platform dwell time by providing visual summary for those who don't read full text

Format: Single-page HTML slide with embedded graphics (1200x1600px optimal for mobile/desktop)

Key Elements:

Header section (compelling title + trial name)
Visual data presentation (key finding with icon/graphic)
3-panel comparison (who benefits, who waits, what's unknown)
Clinical bottom line (action item in highlighted box)
Footer (citation + user attribution)

Design principles:

Medical professional aesthetic (clean, evidence-based, not flashy)
Color palette: cardiology blues (#1E3A8A, #3B82F6, #60A5FA) with accent (#EF4444 for warnings)
Typography: Clear hierarchy, readable at mobile size
Icons: Simple, medical-appropriate (heart, stethoscope, chart symbols)
Data visualization: Bar charts, simple comparisons, clear numbers
White space: Professional, not cluttered

Content structure:

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  TRIAL NAME: Bold Finding          │ ← Header
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  [ICON] KEY RESULT                  │ ← Hero metric
│  XX% vs YY% (p=0.00X)              │
│  NNT = Z                            │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ ✓ CHANGE PRACTICE  ⚠ WAIT  ❓UNKNOWN│ ← 3-panel
│   [details]         [details] [gaps]│
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 🎯 BOTTOM LINE: [actionable]        │ ← Takeaway
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Source: [Journal] | Dr. [Name]     │ ← Attribution
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Technical implementation:

Create standalone HTML file with inline CSS
Use simple SVG icons or Unicode symbols (♥, ⚕, 📊)
Responsive design (flexbox/grid)
No external dependencies
Ready to screenshot or embed

Always deliver:

Editorial text (500 words)
HTML infographic file
Brief note: "Screenshot this slide for social media posting"

社论撰写完成后，制作引人入胜的可视化信息图幻灯片（详见

references/infographic-design.md

）：

目的： 为未阅读全文的读者提供视觉摘要，提升平台停留时间

格式： 单页HTML幻灯片，嵌入图形（1200x1600px为移动端/桌面端最优尺寸）

核心要素：

页眉区域（吸睛标题+试验名称）
可视化数据展示（核心结果搭配图标/图形）
三栏对比模块（获益人群、需等待人群、未知问题）
临床核心结论（高亮框中的行动建议）
页脚（参考文献+用户署名）

设计原则：

符合医学专业审美（简洁、基于证据、不花哨）
配色方案：心脏病学蓝（#1E3A8A、#3B82F6、#60A5FA）搭配警示色（#EF4444）
排版：清晰的层级结构，移动端可读
图标：简洁、符合医学场景（心脏、听诊器、图表符号）
数据可视化：柱状图、简单对比、清晰数据
留白：专业、不拥挤

内容结构：

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  TRIAL NAME: Bold Finding          │ ← Header
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  [ICON] KEY RESULT                  │ ← Hero metric
│  XX% vs YY% (p=0.00X)              │
│  NNT = Z                            │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ ✓ CHANGE PRACTICE  ⚠ WAIT  ❓UNKNOWN│ ← 3-panel
│   [details]         [details] [gaps]│
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 🎯 BOTTOM LINE: [actionable]        │ ← Takeaway
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Source: [Journal] | Dr. [Name]     │ ← Attribution
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

技术实现：

创建独立HTML文件，内嵌CSS
使用简单SVG图标或Unicode符号（♥、⚕、📊）
响应式设计（flexbox/grid）
无外部依赖
可直接截图或嵌入使用

交付内容：

社论文本（500字）
HTML信息图文件
使用说明：“截取该幻灯片截图用于社交媒体发布”

Phase 5: Quality Assurance

第五阶段：质量保证

Before delivering:

Verify all citations link to actual PubMed articles
Check word count (target 500 ± 50 words)
Ensure character count fits 1500-1700 range
Confirm Eric Topol voice consistency
Validate that user appears as authoritative cardiologist
Test infographic renders properly in browser
Ensure infographic visual hierarchy is clear

交付前需完成：

验证所有参考文献链接至真实PubMed文章
检查字数（目标500±50字）
确认字符数在1500-1700范围内
确保Eric Topol风格一致性
确认用户呈现为权威心脏病学家形象
测试信息图在浏览器中正常渲染
确保信息图视觉层级清晰

Abstract-Only Workflow

仅基于摘要的工作流

When only abstract available (common for conference presentations or embargoed trials):

Set ethical boundaries upfront:
- Frame as "commentary on emerging result, not practice verdict"
- Never recommend standard-of-care change from abstract alone
- Use "promising but provisional" tone throughout
Mine abstract systematically:
- Background: clinical problem (can write confidently)
- Methods: extract headlines only (population, intervention, design, endpoint)
- Results: direction of effect, key numbers presented
- Explicitly note missing pieces: inclusion/exclusion details, statistical plan, safety profile
Structure shifts:
- Include "honesty paragraph": "As with any report available only in abstract form, important details are not yet accessible..."
- List 3-5 specific unknowns that matter most
- Talk implications as questions, not prescriptions
- Close with "wait but pay attention" message
Language safety:
- "Based on limited information currently available"
- "If these findings are confirmed in full report"
- "Abstract suggests, but does not yet establish"
- Avoid: "game changer", "paradigm shift", "definitive"

当仅能获取摘要时（常见于会议报告或 embargoed 试验）：

提前明确伦理边界：
- 定位为“对初步结果的评论，而非临床实践结论”
- 绝不能仅基于摘要推荐改变标准临床实践
- 全程使用“前景可观但暂未定论”的语气
系统挖掘摘要信息：
- 背景：临床问题（可自信撰写）
- 方法：仅提取核心信息（研究人群、干预措施、试验设计、终点指标）
- 结果：效应方向、关键数据
- 明确说明缺失信息：纳入/排除标准细节、统计方案、安全性数据
调整结构：
- 增加“坦诚说明段”：“与任何仅能获取摘要的研究一样，重要细节尚未可知……”
- 列出3-5个最关键的未知信息
- 将临床意义表述为问题，而非定论
- 以“需持续关注但暂不行动”的信息收尾
语言规范：
- 使用“基于当前有限信息”
- “若这些结果在全文中得到证实”
- “摘要提示，但尚未证实”
- 避免使用：“改变游戏规则”、“范式转变”、“确定性结论”

Alternative Paths

备选流程

If user rejects machine's trial selection:

Show next-ranked trials (positions 6-10)
Ask user for specific topic preferences
Search by user-specified criteria
Offer manual trial entry (user provides PMID or abstract)

If no recent landmark trials:

Search expanded timeframe (3-6 months)
Consider meta-analyses or guidelines updates
Look for high-impact controversies or debates
Suggest editorial on emerging trends across multiple studies

Topic-specific editorial requests:

User can specify: coronary intervention, structural heart, heart failure, EP, imaging
Filter trials by topic_class before scoring
Adjust scoring weights for user's subspecialty focus

若用户拒绝系统推荐的试验：

展示下一批排名靠前的试验（第6-10名）
询问用户具体主题偏好
根据用户指定的标准搜索
支持手动输入试验信息（用户提供PMID或摘要）

若近期无里程碑式试验：

扩大搜索时间范围（3-6个月）
考虑纳入荟萃分析或指南更新
关注高影响力的争议或辩论
建议撰写关于多项研究的新兴趋势社论

特定主题社论请求：

用户可指定主题：冠脉介入、结构性心脏病、心力衰竭、电生理、影像学
评分前按主题分类筛选试验
根据用户的亚专业方向调整评分权重

Integration Points

集成点

PubMed MCP tools to use:

```
PubMed:search_articles
```
- discover recent trials
```
PubMed:get_article_metadata
```
- retrieve abstracts, titles, authors
```
PubMed:get_full_text_article
```
- retrieve full text when PMCID available
```
PubMed:convert_article_ids
```
- convert PMID to PMCID for full text check
```
PubMed:find_related_articles
```
- discover prior trials for context

For each editorial:

Minimum 3-5 PubMed citations
At least 1 citation for the primary trial being discussed
At least 2-3 citations for contextual prior trials
Include DOIs in all references

需使用的PubMed MCP工具：

```
PubMed:search_articles
```
- 发掘近期试验
```
PubMed:get_article_metadata
```
- 获取文章摘要、标题、作者信息
```
PubMed:get_full_text_article
```
- 当PMCID可获取时获取全文
```
PubMed:convert_article_ids
```
- 将PMID转换为PMCID以检查全文获取权限
```
PubMed:find_related_articles
```
- 发掘用于背景对比的既往试验

每篇社论要求：

至少3-5篇PubMed参考文献
至少1篇参考文献为所讨论的核心试验
至少2-3篇参考文献为背景对照试验
所有参考文献均包含DOI

Quality Standards

质量标准

User portrayal:

Trusted interventional cardiologist with deep expertise
Well-read, synthesizing developments to guide peers
Authority who knows the field comprehensively
Thoughtful skeptic, not cheerleader

Audience assumption:

Well-educated physicians (peers, juniors, seniors, referring MDs)
Appreciate dense scientific concepts
Value evidence-based analysis over opinion
Want actionable insights for practice

Citation discipline:

Every substantive claim grounded in Q1 journal references
When needing context (e.g., PARTNER 1/2 for PARTNER 3 discussion), explicitly request additional references
If user doesn't have references, search PubMed systematically
Focus on: NEJM, JACC family, JAMA family, Lancet, BMJ, Circulation, JAHA, EHJ, similar tier-1

用户形象塑造：

值得信赖的介入心脏病学家，具备深厚专业知识
博览群书，整合最新研究进展为同行提供指导
全面了解领域的权威专家
兼具思考深度与怀疑精神，而非盲目追捧

受众预设：

受过良好教育的医师（同行、青年医师、资深医师、转诊医师）
能理解复杂科学概念
重视循证分析而非主观意见
需要可用于临床实践的 actionable 见解

参考文献规范：

所有实质性主张均基于Q1期刊参考文献
当需要背景信息时（如讨论PARTNER 3时参考PARTNER 1/2），明确请求补充参考文献
若用户无参考文献，系统搜索PubMed获取
重点关注：NEJM、JACC系列、JAMA系列、Lancet、BMJ、Circulation、JAHA、EHJ及同级别期刊

Success Metrics

成功指标

A successful editorial delivery includes:

Identifies genuinely important/landmark trial
Provides critical evidence-based analysis
Positions trial in broader literature context
Offers specific, actionable clinical guidance
Maintains Eric Topol's authoritative voice
Cites all claims with high-quality references
Portrays user as knowledgeable authority
Fits 500-word, 1500-1700 character target
Engages physician audience with dense concepts
Balances enthusiasm with appropriate skepticism
Delivers HTML infographic with clear visual hierarchy
Infographic increases dwell time and engagement

一篇成功的社论需满足：

识别真正重要的里程碑式试验
提供批判性的循证分析
将试验置于更广泛的文献背景中
提供具体、可执行的临床指导
保持Eric Topol的权威风格
所有主张均有高质量参考文献支持
塑造用户为知识渊博的权威形象
符合500字、1500-1700字符的目标
以专业内容吸引医师受众
在热情与适度怀疑间保持平衡
交付视觉层级清晰的HTML信息图
信息图提升用户停留时间与参与度

Final Deliverables

最终交付内容

For each editorial, always provide:

Editorial text (500 words in markdown)
HTML infographic file (1200×1600px, self-contained)
Usage note: "Screenshot this infographic for social media posting (LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram)"
Reference list with PMIDs and DOIs

每篇社论需提供：

社论文本（500字，markdown格式）
HTML信息图文件（1200×1600px，独立可运行）
使用说明：“截取该信息图截图用于社交媒体发布（LinkedIn、Twitter、Instagram）”
参考文献列表，包含PMID和DOI