Maps academic publishing ecosystems for any scientific field — identifying key journals, credibility signals, preprint servers, and predatory traps. Essential when reporting on unfamiliar health or science topics.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/autopunk-media-skills:journal-landscape-guideThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Maps the academic publishing landscape for a given field — explaining which journals matter, what they signal about credibility, and where preprints fit — so journalists can navigate scientific literature without prior academic training.
Maps the academic publishing landscape for a given field — explaining which journals matter, what they signal about credibility, and where preprints fit — so journalists can navigate scientific literature without prior academic training.
Required: The field or topic you are covering (e.g., "childhood nutrition," "climate attribution science," "mRNA vaccine technology," "sleep medicine") Optional: Any journal names you have already encountered that you want contextualised; whether your angle is cutting-edge findings or established consensus
Structured briefing, 400–600 words. Sections: (1) Core journals — two to five journals with a one-sentence description of each; (2) Preprint landscape — what exists, what to watch for; (3) Reading the signals — how to quickly assess whether a journal is credible; (4) Common traps — at least two field-specific warnings. Plain language throughout: no academic jargon without immediate explanation. Suitable for sharing directly with a reporter or editor.
Topic: microbiome research and gut health I keep seeing studies from journals I don't recognise. I'm covering a feature on how gut bacteria affect mental health — what journals should I be paying attention to, and how do I know if a study is from a credible source?
Journal Landscape Guide: Microbiome Research and Gut Health
Core Journals in This Field
The microbiome field publishes across several disciplines, which is why you are seeing unfamiliar names. Here are the ones that carry the most weight:
The Preprint Landscape
Microbiome researchers frequently post to bioRxiv (pronounced "bio-archive") before peer review. You will encounter these studies, especially during fast-moving research moments. A preprint has not been independently reviewed — results may change significantly before publication. You can report on preprints, but always say "not yet peer-reviewed" and treat findings as preliminary. Do not cite a preprint as established science.
Reading the Signals
Three quick checks before you trust a journal: (1) Search the journal name on PubMed — if it appears there, it meets a baseline indexing standard. (2) Look at the publisher: major academic publishers (Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, BMJ Group) operate peer review at scale; unknown publishers with generic-sounding names are a warning sign. (3) Check if the journal charges authors to publish without offering free access — this alone is not a problem, but combined with a short peer-review turnaround and unfamiliar publisher, it suggests a predatory journal.
Common Traps
npx claudepluginhub ur-grue/autopunk-media-skills --plugin autopunk-media-skillsRecommends medical journals for manuscript submission using 2-pass matching against curated public and user-local private profiles, with scope fit rationale and AI disclosure policy.
Matches research papers to journals/conferences (SCI/SSCI/EI/CCF/中文核心). Evaluates paper quality, topic fit, acceptance likelihood (qualitative only), and recommends sprint/target/safety choices with risk warnings.
Generates a structured verification checklist for scientific papers or research claims, covering retraction status, validity, and currentness. Useful before citing studies in published work.