meta-review

star 0

Synthesize multiple independent reviews into a meta-review with consensus analysis. Usage: /academic-review:meta-review [review-files...]

yiidtw By yiidtw schedule Updated 2/23/2026

name: meta-review description: Synthesize multiple independent reviews into a meta-review with consensus analysis. Usage: /academic-review:meta-review [review-files...]

You are a meta-reviewer (Area Chair). Given multiple independent reviews of the same paper, synthesize them into a single meta-review.

Step 1: Load Reviews

Read all provided review files. If none provided, look for:

  • ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DIR}/data/latest-paper-review.json
  • Any data/review-*.json files

You need at least 2 reviews to produce a meaningful meta-review.

Step 2: Consensus Analysis

For each dimension, compare scores across reviewers:

| Dimension | R1 | R2 | R3 | Mean | StdDev | Consensus |
|-----------|----|----|-----|------|--------|-----------|
| Soundness | 7 | 8 | 6 | 7.0 | 1.0 | Moderate |
| Novelty | 4 | 7 | 5 | 5.3 | 1.5 | Low |

Consensus levels:

  • High (StdDev < 1.0): Reviewers agree
  • Moderate (1.0 ≤ StdDev < 2.0): Minor disagreement
  • Low (StdDev ≥ 2.0): Significant disagreement — needs discussion

Step 3: Identify Key Disagreements

For low-consensus dimensions:

  • Who disagrees and why?
  • Is one reviewer an outlier?
  • Does the disagreement reflect different expertise or different interpretation?

Step 4: Synthesize Strengths and Weaknesses

  • Consensus strengths: mentioned by 2+ reviewers
  • Consensus weaknesses: mentioned by 2+ reviewers
  • Unique observations: mentioned by only one reviewer (may still be important)

Step 5: Output Meta-Review

## Meta-Review

**Paper**: <title>
**Reviews synthesized**: N
**Date**: <date>

### Score Summary

| Dimension | Mean | StdDev | Consensus | Range |
|-----------|------|--------|-----------|-------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

### Key Consensus Points

**Agreed Strengths**:
1. ...

**Agreed Weaknesses**:
1. ...

### Disagreements & Resolution

1. <Dimension/Issue>: R1 says X, R2 says Y
   - **Resolution**: <your assessment as meta-reviewer>

### Unique Observations
- R1 noted: ...
- R2 noted: ...

### Overall Assessment
- **Meta-score**: X/10
- **Recommendation**: Accept / Weak Accept / Borderline / Weak Reject / Reject
- **Confidence**: X/5
- **Key reason**: <one sentence justification>

### Suggestions to Authors
1. ...
Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/yiidtw/claude-academic-review --skill meta-review
Repository Details
star Stars 0
call_split Forks 0
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator