name: ahrq-picme-assessment description: "SOP: 使用 AHRQ PiCMe 框架对研究 gap 进行 6 维度系统评估" version: 1.0.0 category: hypothesis-formation type: sop campaign: gap-prioritization input: "GapRecord — 单条标准化 gap 记录" output: "PiCMeAssessment — 6 维度独立评分、综合判定及研究问题草稿" dependencies: skills: - subagent-spawning
AHRQ PiCMe Assessment
使用 AHRQ PiCMe 框架对研究 gap 进行 6 维度系统评估。
HARD-GATE
Pipeline
- 前置检查: 验证输入 GapRecord 完整性;确认 domain 字段有效
- Population (P): 明确该 gap 涉及的目标人群/系统/数据集;评估定义清晰度(1-5)
- Intervention (I): 明确拟议的干预/方法/解决方案;评估可操作性(1-5)
- Comparator (C): 明确对比基线(现有 SOTA、无干预、替代方案);评估基线合理性(1-5)
- Metrics (M): 明确评估指标;评估指标的可测量性和相关性(1-5)
- Evidence (E): 评估现有证据对该 gap 存在性的支持强度(1-5)
- 综合判定: 基于 5 维度均值判定整体质量(strong ≥ 3.5 / moderate 2.5-3.4 / weak < 2.5);生成研究问题草稿
- 输出: 返回 PiCMeAssessment 对象
Output Format
{
"gap_id": "gap_001",
"dimensions": {
"population": { "score": 4, "description": "目标人群描述", "rationale": "..." },
"intervention": { "score": 3, "description": "干预/方法描述", "rationale": "..." },
"comparator": { "score": 3, "description": "对比基线描述", "rationale": "..." },
"metrics": { "score": 4, "description": "评估指标描述", "rationale": "..." },
"evidence": { "score": 4, "description": "证据强度描述", "rationale": "..." }
},
"mean_score": 3.6,
"overall_verdict": "strong",
"research_question_draft": "研究问题草稿(1句)",
"improvement_suggestions": ["建议1", "建议2"]
}