Search Engine Overlaps : Do they agree or disagree?

Identifying relevant studies in software engineering

“…They also advised against retrieving the primary studies from a single venue. Bailey et al [6] analyzed the overlapping phenomenon between results returned from different search engines in SE.…”

Developing search strategies for detecting relevant experiments

“…Other authors (Brereton et al 2007;Bailey et al 2007;Dybå et al 2007b) have identified some of the limitations of bibliographic databases as regards the identification of SE studies. Although (Brereton et al 2007) do not set out to analyse the limitations of bibliographic databases, they discuss, as a spin-off of their SR, a number of lessons learned, some of which imply database limitations.…”

“…Note that their experiences with some digital libraries (IEEEXplore, ACM Digital Library and ScienceDirect) and other indexing services (Google Scholar, Citeseer library, Keele University's electronic library, Inspec and EI Compendex) lead them to conclude that "current software engineering search engines are not designed to support systematic literature reviews". On the other hand, the objective in (Bailey et al 2007) was to analyse the overlap between database results for SE studies. The authors focused their study on analysing a range of bibliographic databases and indexing services (IEEEXplore, ACM Digital Library, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Citeseer and Web of Science) to determine what overlap there was between them in different fields of SE and the impact of such an overlap on SRs.…”

Strength of evidence in systematic reviews in software engineering

“…A systematic search strategy [12] specifies the keyword strings and sources used to find relevant studies in bibliographic databases and other electronic sources. Several databases must usually be searched in order to assure good coverage on the topic [2]. It may also be necessary to search key journals and conference proceedings by hand to identify relevant studies that are not fully indexed.…”

“…In addition to a tool for assessing randomized controlled trials, the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) 2 , at the Public Health Resource Unit in Oxford, has developed a set of tools to help with the process of critically appraising articles of the following types of research: Systematic Reviews, Qualitative Research, Economic Evaluation Studies, Cohort Studies, Case Control Studies, and Diagnostic Test Studies.…”