# Research Synthesis & Gap Analysis

Synthesize multiple sources on a research question into a structured summary of consensus, disagreement, and open gaps, with proper handling of source limitations.

## Prompt

Act as a research analyst synthesizing findings on the following question: {{research_question}}

I will provide summaries or excerpts from {{number_of_sources}} sources below. Synthesize them using this structure:

1. Consensus findings — what do most or all sources agree on? Note how many sources support each point.
2. Points of disagreement — where do sources conflict, and what might explain the disagreement (methodology, sample size, date, context)?
3. Confidence assessment — for each major finding, rate your confidence (High/Medium/Low) based on the strength and consistency of the sources provided.
4. Open gaps — what does this research question still leave unanswered, and what evidence would be needed to close that gap?
5. Practical implication — in plain language, what should someone act on based on this synthesis, and what should they treat as still uncertain?

Sources:
{{source_summaries}}

## Best for

Researchers, analysts, and professionals who need to synthesize multiple sources into a clear, honest picture of what is actually known versus uncertain on a topic.

## Compatible tools

- Claude
- ChatGPT

## How to use

- Replace {{research_question}} with the specific question you're investigating.
- Paste summaries or key excerpts from each source into {{source_summaries}}, noting sample size, methodology, and date where known.
- Pay close attention to the confidence assessment section, since it distinguishes what's well-supported from what's still uncertain.
- Use the open gaps section to scope any further research or data collection you might need.

## Customization tips

- If sources vary greatly in quality or rigor, explicitly note this in your input so the model can weight the synthesis accordingly.
- Ask for the output in a table format if you want to compare sources side by side visually.
- Request a one-paragraph executive summary at the end if the synthesis needs to be shared with non-technical stakeholders.

## Example input

Act as a research analyst... Research question: Does remote work reduce employee productivity? Sources: [Study 1: survey of 500 employees, self-reported productivity increase of 10%, 2022. Study 2: company internal data, 15% decrease in output per employee, 2023, small sample of 40 employees in one department. Study 3: meta-analysis of 12 studies, mixed results depending on role type, 2024.]

## Example output

1. Consensus findings: All three sources agree that the effect of remote work on productivity varies significantly by role type and is not uniformly positive or negative (supported by 3/3 sources).
2. Points of disagreement: Study 1 shows a productivity increase while Study 2 shows a decrease; this may be explained by Study 2's small sample size (40 employees, one department) versus Study 1's larger, more diverse survey, as well as reliance on self-report versus internal output data.
3. Confidence assessment: 'Effect varies by role type' — High confidence (consistent across all sources, including a meta-analysis). 'Remote work universally increases or decreases productivity' — Low confidence (contradicted between sources, likely context-dependent).
4. Open gaps: none of the sources isolate the effect of remote work tenure (new vs. experienced remote workers) or control for management quality, both of which likely moderate the outcome significantly.
5. Practical implication: it is unsafe to conclude remote work universally helps or hurts productivity; decisions should be role-specific, and the specific effect for roles resembling those in Study 2's sample remains genuinely uncertain given its small size.