Cited by 191Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesSoftware Engineering Research

Towards an Evidence-Based Understanding of Electronic Data Sources

Open access
Chen, Lianipng, Babar, Muhammad Ali, Zhang, He·2010·Electronic Workshops in Computing

Abstract

Systematic Literature Reviews and Systematic Mapping Studies are relatively new forms of secondary studies in software engineering. Identifying relevant papers from various Electronic Data Sources (EDS) is one of the key activities of conducting these kinds of studies. Hence, the selection of EDS for searching the potentially relevant papers is an important decision, which can affect a study’s coverage of relevant papers. Researchers usually select EDS mainly based on personal knowledge, experience, and preferences and/or recommendations by other researchers. We believe that building an evidence-based understanding of EDS can enable researchers to make more informed decisions about the selection of EDS. This paper reports our initial effort towards this end. We propose an initial set of metrics for characterizing the EDS from the perspective of the needs of secondary studies. We explain the usage and benefits of the proposed metrics using the data gathered from two secondary studies. We also tried to synthesize the data from the two studies and that from literature to provide initial evidence-based heuristics for EDS selection.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.14236/ewic/ease2010.17

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The study used Grounded theory approach coding steps for mapping challenges.

    “All the team members of the group were using key steps of coding scheme, i.e. code, sub-categories, categories and framework/ theory, of Grounded theory approach [28], [85] as followed by other researchers in their studies [30], [86], [87].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, L., Babar, M. A., & Zhang, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Limerick (IE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Electronic Workshops in Computing
Published
2010
ISSN
1477-9358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1877420198
Cited by
191
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.13
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Electronic workshops in computing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Limerick Institutional Repository (University of Limerick) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • University of Limerick Institutional Repository (University of Limerick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • IT University Of Copenhagen (IT University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Limerick Institutional Repository (University of Limerick)
Funders
Science Foundation Ireland (03/CE2/I303_1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
Keywords
systematic reviews, systematic mapping, secondary studies, database selection, search strategies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review