Search

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard practice as part of software engineering (SE) research, although their quality varies. To build on the reviews, both for future research and industry practice, they need to be of high quality.Aim: To assess the quality of SLRs in SE, we put forward an appraisal instrument for SLRs.Method: A well-established appraisal instrument from research in healthcare was used as a starting point to develop the instrument. It is adapted to SE using guidelines, checklists, and experiences from SE. The first version was reviewed by four external experts on SLRs in SE and updated based on their feedback. To demonstrate its use, the updated version was also used by the authors to assess a sample of six selected systematic literature studies.Results: The outcome of the research is an appraisal instrument for quality assessment of SLRs in SE. The instrument includes 15 items with different options to capture the quality. The instrument also supports consolidating the items into groups, which are then used to assess the overall quality of an SLR.Conclusion: The presented instrument may be helpful support for an appraiser in assessing the quality of SLRs in SE.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Although most people have some experience as caregivers, the nature and context of care are highly variable. Caregiving, socioeconomic factors, and health are all interrelated. For these reasons, caregiver interventions must consider these factors. This review examines the degree to which caregiver intervention research has reported and considered social determinants of health. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:We examined published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions for older adults with age-related chronic conditions using the PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 checklists. From 2,707 papers meeting search criteria, we identified 197 potentially relevant systematic reviews, and selected 33 for the final analysis. RESULTS:We found scant information on the inclusion of social determinants; the papers lacked specificity regarding race/ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. The majority of studies focused on dementia, with other conditions common in later life vastly underrepresented. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS:Significant gaps in evidence persist, particularly for interventions targeting diverse conditions and populations. To advance health equity and improve the effectiveness of interventions, research should address caregiver heterogeneity and improve assessment, support, and instruction for diverse populations. Research must identify aspects of heterogeneity that matter in intervention design, while recognizing opportunities for common elements and strategies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Although most people have some experience as caregivers, the nature and context of care are highly variable. Caregiving, socioeconomic factors, and health are all interrelated. For these reasons, caregiver interventions must consider these factors. This review examines the degree to which caregiver intervention research has reported and considered social determinants of health. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:We examined published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions for older adults with age-related chronic conditions using the PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 checklists. From 2,707 papers meeting search criteria, we identified 197 potentially relevant systematic reviews, and selected 33 for the final analysis. RESULTS:We found scant information on the inclusion of social determinants; the papers lacked specificity regarding race/ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. The majority of studies focused on dementia, with other conditions common in later life vastly underrepresented. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS:Significant gaps in evidence persist, particularly for interventions targeting diverse conditions and populations. To advance health equity and improve the effectiveness of interventions, research should address caregiver heterogeneity and improve assessment, support, and instruction for diverse populations. Research must identify aspects of heterogeneity that matter in intervention design, while recognizing opportunities for common elements and strategies.