Skip to content

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

BioTech

BioTech Prompt Vault

Prompts organised by role. Every prompt names the inputs it needs, how to verify the result, data warnings, limitations and who should review it.

Last reviewed . AI products change quickly; check the linked sources before relying on details.

← Back to the BioTech hub

Production warning

Do not paste confidential trial data, identifiable patient information or proprietary research into services your organisation has not approved. Replace every [PLACEHOLDER] with approved or public content only. Output is a draft for expert review, not validated, compliant or fit for submission.

Research analyst

Refine a research question (PICO)

Turn a vague question into a structured, searchable one and list what is missing.

Research analyst
Use it for
Scoping a literature search before you open PubMed or another database.
Who it is for
Research analysts, founders, medical writers
You will need
  • Your rough question
  • Condition or topic area
  • Any known constraints (population, time window, study type)
What you get back
A PICO breakdown, flagged assumptions, alternative framings and candidate search terms.
Human reviewer
Senior researcher or clinical scientist
Prompt
I am a [ROLE] preparing a literature search. My rough question is: [QUESTION].
Rewrite it as a PICO question (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). List any assumptions you made, any parts of the question that are ambiguous, and 3 alternative framings. Suggest search concepts and synonyms I could use in a database search. Do not cite any papers; this step is only about structuring the question.

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Check each assumption with a subject expert
  • Confirm search terms against a controlled vocabulary such as MeSH in the database itself

Safety and privacy

  • Use general descriptions of the topic. Do not include unpublished programme details.

Limitations

  • The model does not know which framing fits your regulatory or commercial context.

Learn more: Research and literature

Extract evidence from a paper you supply

Pull study design, population, outcomes and limitations into a table from text you paste.

Research analyst
Use it for
Building an evidence table from papers you have already found and are licensed to use.
Who it is for
Research analysts, medical writers
You will need
  • Paper text or abstract you are permitted to use
  • Fields to extract
  • Citation identifier [PMID] or [DOI]
What you get back
A table with a supporting quote per cell and NOT STATED where information is missing.
Human reviewer
Second analyst or subject-matter scientist
Prompt
Below is text from a published paper [PMID or DOI]. Extract only what is explicitly stated into a table with these columns: study design, population and sample size, intervention, comparator, primary outcome, key result as stated, stated limitations. If a field is not stated, write NOT STATED. Quote the exact sentence supporting each cell. Do not infer, calculate or add outside knowledge.

[PASTE TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Open the paper and confirm each quote exists
  • Check numbers against tables and figures, not only the text
  • Check the sample size and outcome definitions yourself

Safety and privacy

  • Respect publisher licences before pasting full text into a service.
  • Do not paste confidential trial data, identifiable patient information or unpublished proprietary research into a service your organisation has not approved.

Limitations

  • Models can mis-read tables, units and subgroups.
  • Abstracts omit limitations that matter.

Learn more: Research and literature

Compare findings across studies

Line up results from several studies you have already extracted, and flag where they disagree.

Research analyst
Use it for
Spotting consistency, conflicts and evidence gaps in a set of verified sources.
Who it is for
Research analysts, medical writers, founders
You will need
  • Verified evidence table (from your own extraction)
  • The question being answered
What you get back
A comparison narrative, a list of disagreements and a list of gaps, with interpretation labelled.
Human reviewer
Senior researcher or biostatistician
Prompt
Using only the evidence table below, compare the studies for the question: [QUESTION]. Describe where results agree, where they differ, and possible reasons visible in the table (population, design, dose, follow-up). List evidence gaps. Do not add studies or facts that are not in the table. Label anything that is your interpretation as INTERPRETATION.

[PASTE VERIFIED TABLE]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Cross-check each claim against the original table row
  • Have a scientist review the explanations for disagreement

Safety and privacy

  • Do not paste confidential trial data, identifiable patient information or unpublished proprietary research into a service your organisation has not approved.

Limitations

  • It cannot weigh study quality or bias reliably.
  • Statistical pooling is outside its safe use.

Learn more: Research and literature

Medical writer

Draft a plain-language summary of a published paper

Produce a first-draft lay summary of a paper you supply, flagged for expert review.

Medical writer
Use it for
Internal explainers or first drafts of lay summaries from already-published work.
Who it is for
Medical writers, communications staff
You will need
  • Published abstract or text
  • Target reading level
  • Citation [PMID] or [DOI]
What you get back
A short lay summary plus a list of points needing clinical review.
Human reviewer
Medical reviewer and your regulatory or compliance reviewer
Prompt
Write a plain-language summary (reading level: [LEVEL]) of the paper text below. Use only what the text states. Do not make claims about benefit, safety or effectiveness beyond what the authors report, and keep the authors' hedging words. End with a list of statements a clinician should check. Include the citation as [PMID/DOI].

[PASTE TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Compare every claim with the source
  • Check that no claim of efficacy or safety is stronger than the source
  • Run your normal medical, legal and regulatory review

Safety and privacy

  • Anything that could reach patients or the public may be promotional or regulated content. Follow your company's review process.

Limitations

  • Simplification can change meaning.
  • Not suitable as approved patient material.

Learn more: Research and literature · Clinical and regulatory awareness

Consistency check on a draft document

Find inconsistent terms, abbreviations and numbers inside a draft you wrote.

Medical writer
Use it for
Editing support for internal drafts; not a substitute for QC against source data.
Who it is for
Medical writers, regulatory writers
You will need
  • Draft text (non-confidential or approved-tool use only)
  • Style guide rules if any
What you get back
A list of located consistency issues with no new content.
Human reviewer
Lead medical writer and QC reviewer
Prompt
Review the draft below for internal consistency only. List: terms used inconsistently, abbreviations used before definition, numbers or units that differ between sections, and sentences whose meaning is unclear. Do not rewrite content or add facts. Give the location of each issue by quoting the surrounding words.

[PASTE DRAFT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Check each flagged item in the draft
  • Do your usual QC against source data and tables

Safety and privacy

  • Drafts of study reports or submissions are usually confidential. Use only a tool your organisation has approved for that content.

Limitations

  • Misses errors that are consistent but wrong.
  • Cannot check numbers against source datasets.

Learn more: Clinical and regulatory awareness

Regulatory affairs

Turn a guidance document into a working checklist

Convert public guidance text you supply into a draft checklist for your regulatory team to review.

Regulatory affairs
Use it for
Getting a starting structure from public guidance for internal discussion.
Who it is for
Regulatory affairs, quality
You will need
  • Public guidance text (with title, issuer, date and version)
  • Your product type and jurisdiction
What you get back
A checklist with quotes, items flagged for interpretation.
Human reviewer
Regulatory affairs lead (with QA where relevant)
Prompt
Below is public regulatory guidance text with its title, issuer and date: [DETAILS]. Convert it into a draft checklist of topics a team should confirm. For each item, quote the sentence it comes from. Do not add requirements that are not in the text. Mark any item that depends on product-specific facts as NEEDS REGULATORY INTERPRETATION. State that this is not regulatory advice.

[PASTE TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Confirm the guidance version is current on the issuer's website
  • Have regulatory staff check each item against the original

Safety and privacy

  • Do not include unpublished product or submission details.

Limitations

  • Cannot decide what applies to your product.
  • Guidance changes; the model may not know the latest version.

Learn more: Clinical and regulatory awareness

Summarise differences between two versions of a public document

Highlight what changed between two versions of public guidance, for the team to verify.

Regulatory affairs
Use it for
Awareness of changes before a proper regulatory impact assessment.
Who it is for
Regulatory affairs, quality
You will need
  • Old version text
  • New version text
  • Document identifiers and dates
What you get back
A side-by-side change list with quotes and no impact judgement.
Human reviewer
Regulatory affairs lead
Prompt
Compare the two versions of [DOCUMENT NAME] below (old dated [DATE], new dated [DATE]). List sections that were added, removed or reworded, quoting both versions side by side. Do not judge impact or compliance. Say clearly where you are unsure whether a change is substantive.

OLD:
[TEXT]

NEW:
[TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Use a document compare tool to confirm the list is complete
  • Regulatory staff assess impact

Safety and privacy

  • Public documents only unless your tool is approved.

Limitations

  • May miss subtle wording changes.
  • Not an impact assessment.

Learn more: Clinical and regulatory awareness

Clinical operations

Meeting notes to action list (de-identified)

Turn de-identified meeting notes into decisions, actions, owners and open questions.

Clinical operations
Use it for
Admin follow-up for internal meetings that contain no patient or confidential trial data.
Who it is for
Clinical operations, project managers
You will need
  • De-identified notes
  • Attendee roles (not names if sensitive)
What you get back
A short structured list of decisions, actions, questions and risks.
Human reviewer
Meeting chair or study manager
Prompt
From the notes below, list: decisions made, actions (owner role, due date if stated), open questions and risks raised. Use only what is in the notes. If an owner or date is not stated, write NOT STATED. Do not invent actions.

[PASTE NOTES]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Attendees confirm the list against their own notes
  • File decisions in your controlled system, not only in the AI output

Safety and privacy

  • Remove patient identifiers, site-level subject data and unblinded information first.
  • Do not paste confidential trial data, identifiable patient information or unpublished proprietary research into a service your organisation has not approved.

Limitations

  • Can attach actions to the wrong person.
  • Not a record of decisions for GCP or quality purposes.

Learn more: Clinical and regulatory awareness · Lab operations

Draft a training outline from an approved document

Create a learning outline from a document your organisation has already approved.

Clinical operations
Use it for
Structuring a briefing or quiz from an approved procedure or protocol summary.
Who it is for
Clinical operations, training coordinators
You will need
  • Approved document text (approved tool only)
  • Audience and time available
What you get back
A sectioned outline, objectives and source-linked questions.
Human reviewer
Process owner and QA
Prompt
Using only the approved text below, draft a training outline for [AUDIENCE] lasting [TIME]. Give learning objectives, key points with the section they come from, and 5 comprehension questions with answers pointing back to the text. Do not add steps or requirements that are not in the text.

[PASTE APPROVED TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Compare every point with the approved document
  • Route finished material through your training document control

Safety and privacy

  • Protocols and SOPs may be confidential. Use approved tools only.

Limitations

  • Training content built from AI output is not approved until your process approves it.

Learn more: Lab operations

Lab manager

Readability review of an SOP draft

Find unclear steps, undefined terms and missing roles in an SOP draft, without changing content.

Lab manager
Use it for
Editorial feedback on a draft before it goes into document control.
Who it is for
Lab managers, quality staff
You will need
  • SOP draft text (approved tool only)
What you get back
A located list of clarity issues with no new procedure content.
Human reviewer
SOP owner and QA
Prompt
Review the SOP draft below for clarity only. List: ambiguous steps, undefined terms or abbreviations, steps with no stated responsible role, and places where order of steps is unclear. Quote each location. Do not rewrite steps, add steps, or comment on scientific correctness or compliance.

[PASTE SOP]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • The SOP author accepts or rejects each suggestion
  • Changes follow your document control and approval process

Safety and privacy

  • Never feed AI-generated steps into a procedure without the approval route.
  • SOPs may contain proprietary methods.

Limitations

  • Cannot judge technical correctness or safety.
  • A cleaner SOP is not necessarily a correct SOP.

Learn more: Lab operations

Summarise an inventory export for ordering admin

Spot low stock, upcoming expiries and duplicate entries from an exported list.

Lab manager
Use it for
Admin overview from a spreadsheet export. The inventory system stays the record.
Who it is for
Lab managers, procurement
You will need
  • Exported list with item, quantity, expiry, location (no sensitive data)
  • Reorder thresholds you set
What you get back
Three lists: low stock, near expiry, possible duplicates, plus a list of incomplete rows.
Human reviewer
Lab manager
Prompt
From the inventory export below, list items below the threshold I gave ([THRESHOLDS]), items expiring within [N] days of [TODAY'S DATE], and apparent duplicate entries. Do not guess missing quantities; list rows with missing data separately.

[PASTE EXPORT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Filter the same data in the spreadsheet or inventory system
  • Check expiry handling for controlled or critical materials in the validated system

Safety and privacy

  • Do not rely on this for controlled substances, hazardous materials or release decisions.

Limitations

  • Date and arithmetic mistakes are possible.
  • Not a replacement for the inventory system.

Learn more: Lab operations

BD / fundraising

Competitive landscape scaffold

Build a structure for a competitor table and a list of facts to verify, not a finished analysis.

BD / fundraising
Use it for
Planning the landscape research and labelling what is known and unknown.
Who it is for
BD, founders, research analysts
You will need
  • Therapeutic area and modality in general terms
  • Competitors you already know (public information)
  • Sources you can check
What you get back
A table template and a source plan, without unverified facts.
Human reviewer
BD lead and a scientific reviewer
Prompt
I am mapping the competitive landscape for [AREA, MODALITY - general terms only]. Propose a table structure (columns) suitable for comparing companies and programmes. Then list, for each column, what public source types I should use to fill it (for example trial registries, company filings, peer-reviewed papers, regulator databases). Do not fill the table with facts from memory. Label any suggestion as HYPOTHESIS.

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Fill the table from primary sources, not from the model
  • Record source and date for every cell

Safety and privacy

  • Keep your own programme details and strategy out of the prompt unless the tool is approved.

Limitations

  • Models can invent companies, trials and numbers. Use only for structure.

Learn more: Business and fundraising

Investor questions to prepare for

Generate likely diligence questions so the team can prepare evidence-backed answers.

BD / fundraising
Use it for
Rehearsal and gap spotting before investor meetings.
Who it is for
Founders, BD
You will need
  • Stage and modality in general terms
  • A non-confidential description of your pitch
What you get back
Grouped questions with the evidence needed for each.
Human reviewer
CEO or CFO and your legal adviser for investor statements
Prompt
Act as a sceptical investor evaluating a [STAGE] [MODALITY] company, described generally as: [NON-CONFIDENTIAL SUMMARY]. List 20 questions on science, clinical plan, regulatory path, IP, team, financing and risks. For each question, say what evidence I would need to answer it credibly. Do not answer the questions or supply facts about my company.

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Assign each question to an owner who answers it with real data
  • Check any statement you plan to use against source documents

Safety and privacy

  • Do not paste unpublished data, term sheets or IP details into an unapproved service.

Limitations

  • Generic questions only; it does not know your investors.

Learn more: Business and fundraising

Founder

Audit pitch deck claims into fact, estimate or hypothesis

Classify each claim in your deck so nothing unsupported is presented as fact.

Founder
Use it for
Final check of deck wording against your own evidence file.
Who it is for
Founders, BD
You will need
  • Deck text (non-confidential or approved tool)
  • Evidence file list
What you get back
A claim-by-claim classification and a list of evidence needed.
Human reviewer
Founder, scientific lead and legal counsel
Prompt
Go through the deck text below. For each claim, classify it as SOURCED FACT (needs a citation), ESTIMATE (needs stated assumptions), HYPOTHESIS, or OPINION. List the evidence that would be needed to support each. Flag wording that could be read as a clinical, safety, efficacy or regulatory-status claim. Do not judge whether claims are true.

[PASTE DECK TEXT]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Check every sourced fact against its source
  • Have counsel review regulatory-status and efficacy wording

Safety and privacy

  • Decks often include unpublished data. Use an approved tool.

Limitations

  • It cannot tell whether a claim is true or legally acceptable.

Learn more: Business and fundraising

Weekly update draft from your own bullet points

Turn rough bullets into a short stakeholder update without adding facts.

Founder
Use it for
Internal or board update drafting from facts you provide.
Who it is for
Founders, chiefs of staff
You will need
  • Bullet points of what actually happened
  • Audience
What you get back
A short structured update with a list of unclear items.
Human reviewer
The author, then a second executive for external updates
Prompt
Turn these bullets into a concise update for [AUDIENCE]. Keep every fact exactly as written and add nothing. Put progress, issues, decisions needed and next steps in separate sections. If a bullet is vague, list it under QUESTIONS FOR AUTHOR instead of rewording it.

[BULLETS]

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • Read the draft against your bullets before sending
  • Check any milestone or timeline wording

Safety and privacy

  • Board and investor updates are confidential. Use approved tools only.

Limitations

  • Tone may overstate progress; read for hype.

Learn more: Business and fundraising

Recruiter

Draft a job description from a role brief

Create a clear, inclusive job description from the requirements you give.

Recruiter
Use it for
First draft of a posting for roles such as clinical research associate or regulatory associate.
Who it is for
Recruiters, hiring managers, HR
You will need
  • Role title and level
  • Must-have and nice-to-have requirements
  • Employer's standard equal opportunity wording
What you get back
A job description draft and a confirmation list.
Human reviewer
Hiring manager and HR
Prompt
Draft a job description for [ROLE, LEVEL] at a [STAGE] biotech. Use only these requirements: [REQUIREMENTS]. Separate must-have from nice-to-have. Use inclusive language and avoid unnecessary credentials. Do not invent salary, benefits, qualifications or regulatory requirements. List items I must confirm before posting.

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • HR and the hiring manager check requirements and any qualification claims
  • Check local employment and discrimination law requirements

Safety and privacy

  • Do not use AI to screen or rank candidates without a documented, reviewed process; check local rules on automated decisions.
  • Do not paste candidate personal data into unapproved tools.

Limitations

  • Titles and required qualifications vary by region and company.

Learn more: Lab operations

Structured interview questions from a competency list

Generate consistent behavioural questions and a scoring guide for each competency.

Recruiter
Use it for
Making interviews consistent across candidates.
Who it is for
Recruiters, hiring managers
You will need
  • Role
  • Competency list
  • Scoring scale
What you get back
Questions with a simple scoring guide per competency.
Human reviewer
HR and the hiring panel
Prompt
For the role [ROLE], create 2 structured behavioural interview questions for each competency in this list: [COMPETENCIES]. For each, give a plain-language description of what a weak, adequate and strong answer looks like. Avoid questions about age, family, health, nationality or other protected characteristics.

Check the output, safety and limits

Verify

  • HR confirms the questions are lawful and consistent with company practice
  • The hiring panel agrees the scoring guide before use

Safety and privacy

  • Never include candidate details in the prompt.

Limitations

  • Does not assess technical competence in specialist biotech roles.

Learn more: Lab operations

Frequently asked questions

What is the BioTech Prompt Vault?

It is a set of prompts organised by biotech role. Every prompt names the inputs it needs, how to verify the result, data warnings, limitations and who should review it. Roles covered include research analyst, medical writer, regulatory affairs, clinical operations, lab manager, business development, founder and recruiter.

Can I paste confidential trial data into these prompts?

No, not into services your organisation has not approved. Do not paste confidential trial data, identifiable patient information or proprietary research into them. Replace every placeholder with approved or public content only, and treat anything the prompt produces as a draft for expert review.

Is AI output from these prompts ready for submission?

No. Output is a draft for expert review, not validated, compliant or fit for submission. Each prompt names a reviewer, so use that guidance to route the draft to a qualified person before it goes anywhere near a controlled record or regulatory document.

How do I use a prompt from the BioTech vault?

Jump to your role, pick a prompt, and check the inputs it lists. Replace each bracketed placeholder with approved or public content, run it in a tool your organisation allows, then follow the listed checks and send the result to the named reviewer.

Where to go next