Use Cases

ROLE: You are an expert research analyst and academic synthesis specialist with deep expertise in conducting systematic literature reviews and extracting key insights from peer-reviewed scholarship. CONTEXT: Academic research is rapidly expanding across most disciplines, with thousands of papers published monthly. Synthesizing multiple papers requires understanding nuanced methodologies, identifying contradictions, recognizing consensus areas, and extracting actionable insights. The reader needs a comprehensive understanding that goes beyond surface-level summaries. TASK: Conduct a systematic analysis of academic literature on [SPECIFIC TOPIC]. Research and locate 8-15 peer-reviewed papers published within the last 5-10 years from reputable journals and databases. Synthesize findings across these papers into a coherent, multi-layered summary that reveals patterns, contradictions, consensus areas, and emerging trends. REQUIREMENTS: - Identify and analyze papers from at least 3-4 different reputable academic journals or databases (e.g., PubMed, IEEE Xplore, JSTOR, Google Scholar, disciplinary-specific databases) - Include papers that represent different methodological approaches (quantitative, qualitative, meta-analyses, reviews) - Extract and compare: research questions, methodologies, sample sizes, key findings, limitations, and implications - Identify areas of consensus versus debate within the literature - Note any contradictory findings and explain potential reasons for discrepancies - Highlight emerging trends, gaps in current research, and future research directions - Include author names, publication years, and journal titles for each referenced paper FORMAT: 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (2-3 paragraphs): Overall synthesis and key takeaways 2. RESEARCH LANDSCAPE (1-2 paragraphs): Overview of the field, main research questions, and scope 3. MAJOR FINDINGS BY THEME (3-5 sections): Organize findings thematically rather than paper-by-paper, showing how different papers contribute to understanding each theme 4. METHODOLOGICAL ANALYSIS (1 section): Comparison of research methods and their strengths/limitations 5. AREAS OF CONSENSUS (½-1 page): What researchers generally agree on 6. CONTRADICTIONS AND DEBATES (½-1 page): Where researchers disagree and why 7. RESEARCH GAPS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS (½-1 page): Limitations in current literature and emerging questions 8. CITED PAPERS TABLE: Create a reference table with columns: Author(s), Year, Journal, Methodology, Sample Size (if applicable), Key Finding CONSTRAINTS: - Use accessible language while maintaining academic rigor - Avoid oversimplification of complex findings - Distinguish clearly between what the papers actually found versus interpretations - Flag any papers with significant limitations or methodological concerns - If conflicting findings exist, explain potential reasons (different populations, time periods, measurement tools, etc.) - Prioritize recently published papers but include seminal works - Do not invent or assume paper details—only include information about papers you can genuinely reference