%0 Journal Article %1 kitchenham2009systematic %A Kitchenham, Barbara Ann %A Brereton, O. Pearl %A Budgen, David %A Turner, Mark %A Bailey, John %A Linkman, Stephen %D 2009 %I Elsevier %J Information and Software Technology %K cost-estimation evidence-based-software-engineering real review systematic-literature-review systematic-review systematic-review-quality tertiary-study %N 1 %P 7-15 %R https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009 %T Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review %U http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584908001390 %V 51 %X Background In 2004 the concept of evidence-based software engineering (EBSE) was introduced at the ICSE04 conference. Aims This study assesses the impact of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) which are the recommended EBSE method for aggregating evidence. Method We used the standard systematic literature review method employing a manual search of 10 journals and 4 conference proceedings. Results Of 20 relevant studies, eight addressed research trends rather than technique evaluation. Seven SLRs addressed cost estimation. The quality of SLRs was fair with only three scoring less than 2 out of 4. Conclusions Currently, the topic areas covered by SLRs are limited. European researchers, particularly those at the Simula Laboratory appear to be the leading exponents of systematic literature reviews. The series of cost estimation SLRs demonstrate the potential value of EBSE for synthesising evidence and making it available to practitioners.

@article{kitchenham2009systematic, abstract = {Background In 2004 the concept of evidence-based software engineering (EBSE) was introduced at the ICSE04 conference. Aims This study assesses the impact of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) which are the recommended EBSE method for aggregating evidence. Method We used the standard systematic literature review method employing a manual search of 10 journals and 4 conference proceedings. Results Of 20 relevant studies, eight addressed research trends rather than technique evaluation. Seven SLRs addressed cost estimation. The quality of SLRs was fair with only three scoring less than 2 out of 4. Conclusions Currently, the topic areas covered by SLRs are limited. European researchers, particularly those at the Simula Laboratory appear to be the leading exponents of systematic literature reviews. The series of cost estimation SLRs demonstrate the potential value of EBSE for synthesising evidence and making it available to practitioners.}, added-at = {2019-11-14T18:56:39.000+0100}, author = {Kitchenham, Barbara Ann and Brereton, O. Pearl and Budgen, David and Turner, Mark and Bailey, John and Linkman, Stephen}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/24738b850fc1ea4c7b2f94b6beb411b90/jpmor}, description = {Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review - ScienceDirect}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009}, interhash = {45c7d67df6668ed3408692867cc9de61}, intrahash = {4738b850fc1ea4c7b2f94b6beb411b90}, issn = {0950-5849}, journal = {Information and Software Technology}, keywords = {cost-estimation evidence-based-software-engineering real review systematic-literature-review systematic-review systematic-review-quality tertiary-study}, note = {Special Section - Most Cited Articles in 2002 and Regular Research Papers}, number = 1, pages = {7-15}, publisher = {Elsevier}, school = {Keele University}, timestamp = {2020-10-07T13:36:50.000+0200}, title = {Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584908001390}, volume = 51, year = 2009 }