2006Electronic workshops in computingOpen access

Experiences Using Systematic Review Guidelines

Mark Staples, Mahmood Niazi

Open full text 34 citations

Abstract

A systematic review is a defined and methodical way to identify, assess and analyse published primary studies in order to investigate a specific research question. Kitchenham has recently published guidelines for software engineering researchers performing systematic reviews. The objective of our paper is to critique Kitchenham’s guidelines and to comment on systematic review generally with respect to our experiences conducting our first systematic review. Our perspective as neophytes may be particularly illuminating for other software engineering researchers who are also considering conducting their first systematic review. Overall we can recommend Kitchenham’s guidelines to other researchers considering systematic reviews. We caution researchers to clearly and narrowly define the research questions they will investigate by systematic review, to reduce the overall effort and to improve the quality of the selection of papers and extraction of data. In particular we recommend defining complementary research questions that are not within the scope of the systematic review in order to clarify the boundaries of the specific research question of interest. An instance of this recommendation is that researchers should clearly define the unit of study for the systematic review.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A systematic review is a defined and methodical way to identify, assess and analyse published primary studies in order to investigate a specific research question. Kitchenham has recently published guidelines for software engineering researchers performing systematic reviews. The objective of our paper is to critique Kitchenham’s guidelines and to comment on systematic review generally with respect to our experiences conducting our first systematic review. Our perspective as neophytes may be particularly illuminating for other software engineering researchers who are also considering conducting their first systematic review. Overall we can recommend Kitchenham’s guidelines to other researchers considering systematic reviews. We caution researchers to clearly and narrowly define the research questions they will investigate by systematic review, to reduce the overall effort and to improve the quality of the selection of papers and extraction of data. In particular we recommend defining complementary research questions that are not within the scope of the systematic review in order to clarify the boundaries of the specific research question of interest. An instance of this recommendation is that researchers should clearly define the unit of study for the systematic review.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 34 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A systematic review is a defined and methodical way to identify, assess and analyse published primary studies in order to investigate a specific research question. Kitchenham has recently published guidelines for software engineering researchers performing systematic reviews. The objective of our paper is to critique Kitchenham’s guidelines and to comment on systematic review generally with respect to our experiences conducting our first systematic review. Our perspective as neophytes may be particularly illuminating for other software engineering researchers who are also considering conducting their first systematic review. Overall we can recommend Kitchenham’s guidelines to other researchers considering systematic reviews. We caution researchers to clearly and narrowly define the research questions they will investigate by systematic review, to reduce the overall effort and to improve the quality of the selection of papers and extraction of data. In particular we recommend defining complementary research questions that are not within the scope of the systematic review in order to clarify the boundaries of the specific research question of interest. An instance of this recommendation is that researchers should clearly define the unit of study for the systematic review.

Key concepts: Systematic review, Scope (computer science), Computer science, Management science, Data science, Engineering ethics, MEDLINE, Engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Experiences Using Systematic Review Guidelines — Research Paper | ScholarLens