Automated Selection and Quality Assessment of Primary Studies

Yusra Shakeel, J. Krüger, Ivonne von Nostitz-Wallwitz, G. Saake, Thomas Leich
{"title":"Automated Selection and Quality Assessment of Primary Studies","authors":"Yusra Shakeel, J. Krüger, Ivonne von Nostitz-Wallwitz, G. Saake, Thomas Leich","doi":"10.1145/3356901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers use systematic literature reviews (SLRs) to synthesize existing evidence regarding a research topic. While being an important means to condense knowledge, conducting an SLR requires a large amount of time and effort. Consequently, researchers have proposed semi-automatic techniques to support different stages of the review process. Two of the most time-consuming tasks are (1) to select primary studies and (2) to assess their quality. In this article, we report an SLR in which we identify, discuss, and synthesize existing techniques of the software-engineering domain that aim to semi-automate these two tasks. Instead of solely providing statistics, we discuss these techniques in detail and compare them, aiming to improve our understanding of supported and unsupported activities. To this end, we identified eight primary studies that report unique techniques that have been published between 2007 and 2016. Most of these techniques rely on text mining and can be beneficial for researchers, but an independent validation using real SLRs is missing for most of them. Moreover, the results indicate the necessity of developing more reliable techniques, providing access to their implementations, and extending their scope to further activities to facilitate the selection and quality assessment of primary studies.","PeriodicalId":15582,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ)","volume":"27 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3356901","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Researchers use systematic literature reviews (SLRs) to synthesize existing evidence regarding a research topic. While being an important means to condense knowledge, conducting an SLR requires a large amount of time and effort. Consequently, researchers have proposed semi-automatic techniques to support different stages of the review process. Two of the most time-consuming tasks are (1) to select primary studies and (2) to assess their quality. In this article, we report an SLR in which we identify, discuss, and synthesize existing techniques of the software-engineering domain that aim to semi-automate these two tasks. Instead of solely providing statistics, we discuss these techniques in detail and compare them, aiming to improve our understanding of supported and unsupported activities. To this end, we identified eight primary studies that report unique techniques that have been published between 2007 and 2016. Most of these techniques rely on text mining and can be beneficial for researchers, but an independent validation using real SLRs is missing for most of them. Moreover, the results indicate the necessity of developing more reliable techniques, providing access to their implementations, and extending their scope to further activities to facilitate the selection and quality assessment of primary studies.
初级研究的自动选择和质量评估
研究人员使用系统文献综述(slr)来综合有关研究主题的现有证据。虽然单反是浓缩知识的重要手段,但进行单反需要大量的时间和精力。因此,研究人员提出了半自动技术来支持审查过程的不同阶段。最耗时的两项任务是(1)选择主要研究和(2)评估其质量。在本文中,我们报告了一个单反,在这个单反中,我们识别、讨论并综合了软件工程领域的现有技术,这些技术旨在将这两个任务半自动化。我们不是单独提供统计数据,而是详细讨论并比较这些技术,旨在提高我们对受支持和不受支持的活动的理解。为此,我们确定了2007年至2016年间发表的八项报告独特技术的主要研究。这些技术大多依赖于文本挖掘,对研究人员来说可能是有益的,但大多数技术都缺少使用真实单反进行独立验证的方法。此外,结果表明有必要发展更可靠的技术,提供其实施的机会,并将其范围扩大到进一步的活动,以促进初级研究的选择和质量评估。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信