Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology
the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology
GitHub辅助判断糖尿病、内分泌或代谢研究是否适合投稿《柳叶刀·糖尿病与内分泌学》。提供期刊定位、证据门槛、报告规范及拒稿启发式检查，用于选题评估和框架调整，非临床建议。
Trigger Scenarios
作者拟向该刊投稿糖尿病或内分泌临床研究并寻求匹配度评估
需将试验或队列研究重构为具有国际影响力的临床问题
在《柳叶刀》子刊与其他内分泌/糖尿病期刊间做选择
查询该刊的报告指南、注册要求及desk-reject标准
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology",
"description": "Use when targeting The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology or deciding whether a diabetes, endocrine, or metabolic study fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the major-trial and population-research evidence bar, reporting-guideline and registration requirements, Lancet specialty house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics. Venue-fit aid only, not clinical advice."
}
The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology (the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology)
Journal positioning
The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology is a Lancet specialty journal for high-impact clinical and population research across diabetes, obesity, endocrine, and metabolic medicine — type 1 and type 2 diabetes, obesity and metabolic disease, thyroid, adrenal, pituitary, bone and mineral, and reproductive endocrinology. It favors major randomized trials, large prospective cohorts, and population/epidemiological analyses with clear international clinical or policy consequence, with a strong emphasis on rigorous design, hard or patient-important outcomes, and generalizable populations. Small single-center endocrine series, mechanistic/basic-science work without a clinical endpoint, and routine biomarker-association studies are a weak fit and belong in a broad clinical-endocrinology or basic-science venue. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing aid; it is not clinical or regulatory advice and does not replace the journal's current instructions for authors. Before submitting, re-check the live The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology author instructions.
When to trigger
- The author names The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology for a diabetes, endocrine, or metabolic clinical/population study and wants a fit/framing check.
- A trial or large cohort must be re-framed around an international, practice-changing diabetes or endocrine question.
- The author is choosing between The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Diabetologia, and general medicine.
- The author needs the journal's reporting-guideline, registration, and desk-reject expectations for metabolic/endocrine evidence.
Scope & topic fit
- Randomized trials in diabetes pharmacotherapy, glucose-lowering and cardiovascular-/ renal-outcome trials, and obesity/metabolic interventions.
- Large prospective cohorts and high-quality observational studies on diabetes/obesity burden, complications, prognosis, or treatment effect at scale.
- Endocrine trials and cohorts (thyroid, adrenal, pituitary, bone/mineral, reproductive) with patient-important outcomes.
- Population, epidemiological, and health-policy studies on metabolic disease with international or equity relevance.
- Pragmatic, implementation, and prevention trials, and well-powered diagnostic studies, in diabetes/endocrinology.
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses resolving a focused, clinically consequential metabolic or endocrine question.
Method & evidence bar
- Trials must be adequately powered with prespecified, patient-important primary outcomes (cardiovascular/renal events, mortality, body-weight or glycaemic endpoints with clinical anchoring); surrogate-only endpoints need strong justification.
- The applicable reporting guideline and completed checklist are expected: CONSORT for trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, STARD for diagnostic accuracy.
- Trials require prospective registration; the registration number, protocol, and statistical-analysis plan are expected.
- Observational and Mendelian-randomization claims must address confounding, pleiotropy, selection bias, and missing data; causal language must match the design.
- Effect estimates need confidence intervals and absolute as well as relative measures; generalizability across populations and health systems should be argued.
- Multi-center, international, and registry/linkage-scale evidence strengthens fit; single-center metabolic series rarely clear the bar.
Structure & house style
- Lancet specialty format with a structured summary and a Research in context / evidence-before-this-study panel; re-check current article types and limits on the live guide.
- The introduction frames the international clinical or policy gap in metabolic/endocrine care; the discussion states the practice consequence and limitations plainly.
- A CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA flow diagram is expected where applicable; tables/figures follow Lancet statistical-reporting standards.
- The role of the funding source statement and a data-sharing statement are expected; appendices carry protocol, full statistical methods, and additional analyses.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.mdand../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the ICMJE/EQUATOR and Lancet anchors, then cite the current The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology page you checked. - Search the live site for "The Lancet Diabetes Endocrinology information for authors" and follow the current version.
- Re-check article types, structured-summary and Research in context format, and word/reference/figure limits.
- Confirm trial registration, the reporting checklist (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA/STARD), protocol/SAP, the role-of-funding-source statement, and data-sharing statement.
- Re-check IRB/ethics and consent, ICMJE authorship and conflict-of-interest disclosure, funding, and AI-use disclosure.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
- The study answers an international, practice-changing diabetes/endocrine/metabolic question.
- The primary outcome is prespecified and patient-important; the study is adequately powered.
- The correct reporting checklist (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA/STARD) is completed and attached.
- Trials are prospectively registered with the number in the manuscript; protocol/SAP provided.
- Confounding, pleiotropy/selection bias, and missing data are addressed; causal language matches the design.
- IRB/consent, ICMJE disclosures, role-of-funding-source, and a data-sharing statement are prepared.
Common desk-reject triggers
- Single-center or underpowered diabetes/endocrine studies with limited generalizability and no practice change.
- Mechanistic or basic-metabolism work with no clinical endpoint, better suited to a basic-science venue.
- Surrogate-only endpoints (e.g., HbA1c change with no clinical anchoring) presented as definitive.
- Routine biomarker- or genetic-association studies without practice-changing consequence.
- Missing trial registration, protocol, or the required reporting checklist.
- Narrow scope without international clinical or policy relevance.
Re-routing decision
- Broad clinical endocrinology (thyroid/adrenal/pituitary/bone) without practice-changing scale →
journal-of-clinical-endocrinology-and-metabolism(Endocrine Society, broad clinical). - Diabetes work including basic/translational science →
diabetologia(EASD, diabetes incl. basic science). - Population/policy framing without a clinical metabolic endpoint →
the-lancet-public-health. - Endocrine-related respiratory or critical-care comorbidity dominant →
the-lancet-respiratory-medicine. - Broad, practice-changing significance beyond the specialty → general medicine (
jama/ NEJM / The Lancet in the natural-science bundle).
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
[Specialty tags] <2–3 closest diabetes/endocrine/metabolic topics>
[Study design / reporting guideline] <RCT-CONSORT / cohort-STROBE / review-PRISMA / diagnostic-STARD>
[Method/evidence] <power, design, registration, generalizability — does it clear the major-trial bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / registration / checklist / role-of-funding / ethics / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 12:36
