Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

基于清单的结构化稿件/基金评审。适用于撰写有明确标准的正式同行评审，涵盖方法学评估、统计有效性、报告规范符合性（CONSORT/STROBE）及建设性反馈。最适合实际评审撰写与稿件修订。评估主张与证据质量请使用“科学批判性思维”；如需定量评分框架，请使用“学者评估”。