The use of systematic reviews in evidence based software engineering: a systematic mapping study

Ronnie E. S. Santos, C. Magalhães, F. Silva
{"title":"The use of systematic reviews in evidence based software engineering: a systematic mapping study","authors":"Ronnie E. S. Santos, C. Magalhães, F. Silva","doi":"10.1145/2652524.2652553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context. A decade ago, Kitchenham, Dybå and Jørgensen argued that software engineering could benefit from an evidence-based research approach similar that that used in medicine, introducing the basis for Evidence Based Software Engineering (EBSE). Objective. Our main goal is to understand the evolution of the use of systematic reviews as the main research method in EBSE, as proposed by Kitchenham et al., by investigating primary and tertiary studies that explore any aspect, theory, or concept around the use of systematic reviews in software engineering. Method. A systematic mapping study protocol was used to find and selected studies about EBSE and systematic reviews in SE, published between 2004 and 2013. Results. We selected 52 unique papers classified as non-empirical studies (12), empirical studies (31), and tertiary studies (9). Conclusion. SLR has become an important component of software engineering research with nearly 200 unique reviews catalogued by the tertiary studies. Most important limitations are related to the industrial relevance and application of the results of reviews and the poor use of synthesis method to aggregate evidence","PeriodicalId":124452,"journal":{"name":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2652524.2652553","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Context. A decade ago, Kitchenham, Dybå and Jørgensen argued that software engineering could benefit from an evidence-based research approach similar that that used in medicine, introducing the basis for Evidence Based Software Engineering (EBSE). Objective. Our main goal is to understand the evolution of the use of systematic reviews as the main research method in EBSE, as proposed by Kitchenham et al., by investigating primary and tertiary studies that explore any aspect, theory, or concept around the use of systematic reviews in software engineering. Method. A systematic mapping study protocol was used to find and selected studies about EBSE and systematic reviews in SE, published between 2004 and 2013. Results. We selected 52 unique papers classified as non-empirical studies (12), empirical studies (31), and tertiary studies (9). Conclusion. SLR has become an important component of software engineering research with nearly 200 unique reviews catalogued by the tertiary studies. Most important limitations are related to the industrial relevance and application of the results of reviews and the poor use of synthesis method to aggregate evidence
基于证据的软件工程中系统评审的使用:系统映射研究
上下文。十年前,Kitchenham, dyb和Jørgensen认为软件工程可以从类似于医学的循证研究方法中受益,并引入了基于证据的软件工程(EBSE)的基础。目标。我们的主要目标是了解系统审查作为EBSE主要研究方法的使用演变,正如Kitchenham等人提出的那样,通过调查初级和第三级研究,探索围绕软件工程中系统审查使用的任何方面、理论或概念。方法。采用系统制图研究方案查找并选择2004年至2013年间发表的有关EBSE的研究和SE的系统综述。结果。我们选择了52篇独特的论文,分为非实证研究(12篇)、实证研究(31篇)和高等教育研究(9篇)。单反已经成为软件工程研究的一个重要组成部分,有近200篇独特的评论被高等院校编目。最重要的限制与审查结果的工业相关性和应用以及综合方法在收集证据方面的不良使用有关
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信