Rapid Reviews in Software Engineering

This is a very brief presentation about our Chapter on Rapid Reviews in Software Engineering in the book entitled Contemporary Empirical Methods in Software Engineering edited by Michael Felderer and Guilherme Travassos.

You find the book on: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783...

The chapter pre-print you find open on: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.10006.pdf

You find a video of this presetation on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HapjihYRofY

For more information about Rapid Reviews and other topics related to Knowledge Transfer between academia and practice in the software development context you should visit my website on: http://brunocartaxo.com/

Transcript

1. RAPID REVIEWS IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AUTHORS Bruno Cartaxo | email@brunocartaxo.com Gustavo Pinto | gpinto@ufpa.br Sergio Soares | scbs@cin.ufpe.br PRESENTED BY Bruno Cartaxo @brunocartaxo
2. In 2004...
3. HOWEVER.... MANY ARE CLAIMING THAT SOFTWARE ENGINEERING RESEARCH LACKS CONNECTION WITH PRACTICE IN PARTICULAR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
4. EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE (EBM) ALSO FACED A SIMILAR PROBLEM
5. EBM HAS BEEN APPROACHING THAT TROUGHT... RAPID REVIEWS
6. RAPID REVIEWS ARE ADAPTATIONS OF THE TRADITIONAL SYSTEMATIC REVIEW METHOD TO MEET THE SOME GOALS: • Should be performed in close collaboration with practitioners, bounded to practical problems, and conducted within practitioners context • Reduce costs and time of heavyweight methods • Results should be reported through appealing mediums to practitioners
8. RAPID REVIEWS ARE NOT INTENDED TO REPLACE SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
9. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE RIGOROUS EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS RAPID REVIEWS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO PRACTITIONERS IN A TIMELY AND APPEALING MANNER
10. RRs and SLRs SIDE BY SIDE
11. RRs and SLRs SIDE BY SIDE
12. EVIDENCE BRIEFINGS
13. DATA FROM OCTOBER 2020
14. Demand for a Rapid Review • Practitioners ask for a Rapid Review • Researcher aligns her/his research agenda based on a practical problem • Researcher prospects a research agenda based on a practical problem
15. Stakeholders Roles 100% executed by researchers 100% executed by practitioners • Researchers’ role is to guarantee methodological consistency and transparency • Practitioners’ role is to make sure that the research is bounded to a practical problem
16. TRANSPARENCY is the gold standard in rapid reviews
17. Publishing Rapid Reviews in Scientific Peer Reviewed Venues Rapid reviews can and should also be published in academic peer reviewed venues RRs are usually inserted into broader knowledge/technology transfer initiatives, and such initiatives are usually very enriching and welcomed in scientific venues
18. FUTURE DIRECTIONS More RRs in SE Compare RRs with SLRs Impact of RRs in practice 18
19. RAPID REVIEWS IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AUTHORS Bruno Cartaxo | email@brunocartaxo.com Gustavo Pinto | gpinto@ufpa.br Sergio Soares | scbs@cin.ufpe.br PRESENTED BY Bruno Cartaxo @brunocartaxo