How to Use: Consensus Evidence Quote Checklist from Abstract Notes (No Invented P Values)
How to use the Consensus Evidence Quote Checklist from Abstract Notes (No Invented P Values) PromptDig prompt without inventing metrics.
You pasted messy Consensus abstract notes and need a clean deliverable without invented numbers. This PromptDig prompt turns only what you already listed into a structured evidence-quote checklist for evidence quote handoffs.
What this prompt does
It locks your abstract notes, version, labels, and domain fields, then builds a ledger plus a table that refuses fake metrics. Missing cells stay NOT IN INPUTS instead of guessing.
Use it when you already have real stubs from Consensus and want a teachable evidence-quote checklist for this job, not a generic template swap from another vendor. The Generate steps name Consensus nouns on purpose so a title swap into another category would fail the swap-title test.
The deliverable is aimed at Consensus evidence-quote checklists. Reviewers should see your locked nouns echoed in the table rows, not marketing fluff. Cap style limits stay soft unless you add them later in Extra.
How to fill the brackets
- Paste your abstract notes with concrete nouns only. Prefer two labeled rows so the example shape stays visible after you swap names.
- Lock Version to what you actually run. If you do not know the version, write unknown rather than guessing a marketing release name.
- Fill labels you may quote only when you already have names you are allowed to use.
- Complete the domain fields that match this job. Leave blanks as UNKNOWN instead of inventing p values, effect sizes, citation scoreboards.
- Set Banned and Never to the phrases you refuse. Keep Format and Lang explicit.
Keep Harbor Quay sample nouns out of your production paste. Those labels exist only so the example_input shows two concrete rows. Replace them with your real labels before you run the prompt.
Who it is for
Researchers who inherit messy Consensus abstract notes. It is also useful when a teammate hands you a partial export and you need a evidence-quote checklist that stays honest about gaps.
How to run it
- Open Consensus Evidence Quote Checklist from Abstract Notes (No Invented P Values) on PromptDig.
- Copy the prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini.
- Replace every bracket with your locked abstract notes. Do not leave sample Harbor nouns in place if they are not yours.
- Run once, then fix only the gaps list. Do not ask the model to invent missing metrics.
- Paste the evidence-quote checklist into your handoff doc and keep NOT IN INPUTS visible for reviewers.
What good output looks like
A strong run starts with an honesty ledger that quotes your locked nouns and Version. The tables attach only names that appeared beside each other in Inputs. Refuse lines explicitly reject fake p values, effect sizes, citation scoreboards.
Weak output invents metrics, adds vendor features not in Version, or swaps in another tool's nouns. If you see that, tighten Banned and Never, then rerun.
Common mistakes
- Inventing p values, effect sizes, or citation scoreboards the notes never stated.
- Treating UNKNOWN as a cue to guess defaults.
- Dropping the gaps list so reviewers cannot see what is still owed.
- Softening Never so the model pads with industry averages.
- Copying a Elicit or Semantic Scholar template and hoping the nouns still fit.
When not to use it
Skip this prompt if you have no Consensus abstract notes at all. It will not invent a starter inventory for you. Skip it if you need live dashboard sync or API pulls; this is a checklist compiler from pasted text only.
Soft next steps
After you lock a clean evidence-quote checklist, browse related PromptDig prompts for nearby jobs, or share your own improved version with the community.
Consensus Evidence Quote Checklist from Abstract Notes (No Invented P Values)