clinical-case-report skill

Clinical Case Report Skill

Generate a structured medical case presentation for clinical rounds, conferences, or documentation. The output follows standard medical formatting conventions used in hospital settings worldwide.

What you will produce

A single-page HTML case report (index.html). Content varies by format (see references/case-formats.md — selected in Step 0):

SOAP / Conference format:

pertinent positives and negatives

• Patient identification — age, sex, chief complaint
• History of Present Illness (HPI) — chronological narrative with

with clinical reasoning for each

• Past Medical History, Medications, Allergies
• Review of Systems
• Physical Examination — systematic findings by system
• Vital Signs — formatted table with reference ranges and flags
• Investigations — laboratory results and imaging findings
• Assessment — primary diagnosis and differential (3–5 items)

• Management Plan — evidence-based, organised by problem

Brief Rounds format (daily review, ward round, handover, ICU, post-call):

• ID line — age, sex, day of admission, primary problem
• Interval events / current status — what has changed since last review
• Active problems — numbered list
• Plan-by-problem — concise actions for each active problem
• Full HPI and systematic physical examination are not included

Step-by-step workflow

Step 0 — Load reference files

Before starting, read both reference files:

format (SOAP, Conference, or Brief Rounds) based on the user's context

1. references/case-formats.md — use this to choose the correct output

must pass all P0 items before emitting the final artifact

1. references/checklist.md — keep P0 gates in mind throughout; you

Step 1 — Parse the brief

Read the user's prompt and extract:

• Patient age and sex
• Chief complaint or presenting problem
• Any vitals, labs, or imaging the user has provided
• Clinical context: ED, ward rounds, conference case, outpatient, etc.
• Specialty context: cardiology, emergency, internal medicine, etc.

If the chief complaint or presenting problem is missing:

• SOAP / Conference: ask one clarifying question before proceeding. Do not proceed without it.
• Brief Rounds: if the admission problem or ID line is already available (e.g. "day-3 ICU review for septic shock"), proceed directly — a separate chief complaint is not required.

Step 2 — Build the clinical narrative

For SOAP / Conference outputs: write the HPI as a continuous prose narrative in standard clinical style:

"This is a [age]-year-old [sex] with a history of [relevant PMH] who

presents with [chief complaint]. Symptoms began [timeline] and are

characterised by [quality, severity, radiation]. Associated symptoms

include [list]. Pertinent negatives include [list]."

The HPI must be chronological. Include timeline markers ("2 hours prior to presentation", "onset yesterday morning").

For Brief Rounds outputs (daily review, ward round, handover, ICU, post-call): skip the full HPI and examination. Instead produce:

• ID line: "[Age][sex], Day [N] of admission, [primary problem]"
• Interval events / current status: what has changed since last review
• Active problems: numbered list
• Plan-by-problem: concise action for each active problem

Step 3 — Generate physiologically consistent clinical data

If the user has not provided specific values, generate values that are internally consistent with the diagnosis:

Consistency checks (typical patterns):

impaired capillary refill — but medications (beta-blockers), age, or shock type (neurogenic, spinal) can alter this pattern

• A patient in shock typically has: HR >100, SBP <90, raised lactate,

temperature >38°C — but afebrile pneumonia exists, especially in the elderly or immunocompromised

• Pneumonia typically presents with raised WBC, raised CRP,

high-sensitivity troponin — but early presentations may have initially normal troponin; CK-MB is not universally required

• A STEMI typically shows ST elevation in contiguous leads and raised

temperature abnormality — but compensated early sepsis may present with normal vitals

• Sepsis typically shows raised or low WBC, raised lactate >2,

(state which), glucose in mmol/L, haemoglobin in g/dL

• Lab units must match convention: creatinine in µmol/L or mg/dL

Critical rule — preserve user-provided data:

note the atypical presentation in the assessment rather than forcing canonical numbers

• Never overwrite a value the user has explicitly stated
• If a user-provided value is atypical for the diagnosis, keep it and

• Never generate a value that contradicts the stated diagnosis

Step 4 — Write the assessment

The assessment section must contain:

most likely diagnosis

1. Primary diagnosis stated clearly on the first line
2. Clinical reasoning — one sentence explaining why this is the

sentence of supporting or refuting evidence

1. Differential diagnosis — exactly 3 to 5 items, each with one

applicable (TIMI for ACS, GRACE for ACS, Killip class + Shock Index for STEMI/cardiogenic shock, CURB-65 for pneumonia, qSOFA for sepsis, Wells for PE, etc.). Killip class and Shock Index together are accepted as sufficient risk stratification for STEMI/cardiogenic shock cases.

1. Risk stratification — include a validated clinical score where

Step 5 — Write the management plan

The plan must be: