The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Towards an Evidence-Based Understanding of Electronic Data Sources
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“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].”
From Prioritization based taxonomy of DevOps security challenges using PROMETHEE (2020) · cites this paper as [28]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Information and Software Technology
Achimugu, P., & Selamat, A. (2014) · Cited by 780
(2004) · doi:10.5555/998675.999432 · Cited by 656
Evidence-based software engineering for practitioners
Dyba, T., Kitchenham, B. A., & Jørgensen, M. (2005) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/ms.2005.6 · Cited by 463
Evidence-based software engineering
Kitchenham, B. A., Dyba, T., & Jørgensen, M. (2004) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1109/icse.2004.1317449 · Cited by 457
Applying Systematic Reviews to Diverse Study Types: An Experience Report
Dyba, T., Dingsoyr, T., & Hanssen, G. K. (2007) · First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007) · doi:10.1109/esem.2007.59 · Cited by 391
Bjørnson, F. O., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.03.006 · Cited by 366
A Visual Text Mining approach for Systematic Reviews
Malheiros, V., Höhn, E. N., de Pinho, R., Mendonça, M., & Maldonado, J. C. (2007) · Proceedings of the ... ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement/International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement · doi:10.1109/esem.2007.21 · Cited by 334
Variability management in software product lines: a systematic review
Chen, L., Babar, M. A., & Alí, N. (2009) · Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) · doi:10.5555/1753235.1753247 · Cited by 232
Self-citationDeveloping search strategies for detecting relevant experiments
Dieste, O., Grimán, A., & Juristo, N. (2009) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-008-9091-7 · Cited by 200
Search Engine Overlaps : Do they agree or disagree?
Bailey, J., Zhang, C., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Charters, S. (2007) · doi:10.1109/rebse.2007.4 · Cited by 44
Evidence-Based Software Engineering for Practitioners
(2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-32179-8_4 · Cited by 31
A Status Report on the Evaluation of Variability Management Approaches
Chen, L., Babar, M. A., & Cawley, C. (2009) · Electronic workshops in computing · doi:10.14236/ewic/ease2009.14 · Cited by 25
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management
Li, Z., Avgeriou, P., & Liang, P. (2014) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2014.12.027 · Cited by 746
Shahin, M., Ali Babar, M., & Zhu, L. (2017) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2685629 · Cited by 680
Self-citationState of the art of cyber-physical systems security: An automatic control perspective
Zacchia Lun, Y., D’Innocenzo, A., Smarra, F., Malavolta, I., & Di Benedetto, M. D. (2019) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2018.12.006 · Cited by 211
Applications of ontologies in requirements engineering: a systematic review of the literature
Dermeval, D., Vilela, J., Bittencourt, I. I., Castro, J. B., Isotani, S., Brito, P. H. S., & Silva, A. (2015) · Requirements Engineering · doi:10.1007/s00766-015-0222-6 · Cited by 198
Challenges and solutions when adopting DevSecOps: A systematic review
Rajapakse, R. N., Zahedi, M., Babar, M. A., & Shen, H. (2022) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106700 · Cited by 235
Self-citation
Metadata
- 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
- Publisher
- BCS Learning & Development
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- 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
