%0 Conference Paper %1 Kitchenham_softwaremetrics_2004 %A Kitchenham, B.A. %B Software Metrics, 2004. Proceedings. 10th International Symposium on %D 2004 %K methodology rejected %P xii-xii %R 10.1109/METRIC.2004.1357885 %T Systematic reviews %X During the past few years, I have become interested in evidence-based software engineering 5. The evidence-based paradigm began in medicine and has totally revolutionised medical research 7. It is now being adopted by a number of humancentered disciplines such as nursing, social policy, education etc. Although I have some reservations about whether software engineering can adopt fully the evidencebased paradigm, I am convinced that we should adopt certain aspects of the approach immediately. In particular, I believe we should adopt systematic review in place of ad hoc literature reviews, and recognise that a systematic review is a research method in its own right. Currently, all PhD students need to conduct a literature review as a part of their research but such reviews are seldom performed with the rigour now being required in other disciplines (including Information Systems Research, 6). A systematic review is rigorous method of synthesising existing research related to a topic of interest. Quantitative meta-analysis is one form of systematic review, but it is not mandatory to provide a quantitative summary. Systematic reviews aim to provide a synthesis that is complete (with respect to defined criteria) and unbiased. Systematic reviews must be rigorous i.e. be conducted according to a well-defined procedure and open i.e. the research process must be reported in a manner is understandable to other researchers.

@inproceedings{Kitchenham_softwaremetrics_2004, abstract = {During the past few years, I have become interested in evidence-based software engineering [5]. The evidence-based paradigm began in medicine and has totally revolutionised medical research [7]. It is now being adopted by a number of humancentered disciplines such as nursing, social policy, education etc. Although I have some reservations about whether software engineering can adopt fully the evidencebased paradigm, I am convinced that we should adopt certain aspects of the approach immediately. In particular, I believe we should adopt systematic review in place of ad hoc literature reviews, and recognise that a systematic review is a research method in its own right. Currently, all PhD students need to conduct a literature review as a part of their research but such reviews are seldom performed with the rigour now being required in other disciplines (including Information Systems Research, [6]). A systematic review is rigorous method of synthesising existing research related to a topic of interest. Quantitative meta-analysis is one form of systematic review, but it is not mandatory to provide a quantitative summary. Systematic reviews aim to provide a synthesis that is complete (with respect to defined criteria) and unbiased. Systematic reviews must be rigorous i.e. be conducted according to a well-defined procedure and open i.e. the research process must be reported in a manner is understandable to other researchers.}, added-at = {2014-05-20T19:41:28.000+0200}, author = {Kitchenham, B.A.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c6b706e1a58a4696403f8c5d85bc026c/sauli}, booktitle = {Software Metrics, 2004. Proceedings. 10th International Symposium on}, doi = {10.1109/METRIC.2004.1357885}, interhash = {41bb8cebce3f3c221f9c762caf1b9860}, intrahash = {c6b706e1a58a4696403f8c5d85bc026c}, issn = {1530-1435}, keywords = {methodology rejected}, month = {Sept}, pages = {xii-xii}, timestamp = {2014-10-07T07:32:24.000+0200}, title = {Systematic reviews}, year = 2004 }