SLR-TOOL - A Tool for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews

Ana M. Fernández-Sáez, Marcela Genero Bocco, Francisco P. Romero


Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have been gaining a significant amount of attention from Software Engineering researchers since 2004. SLRs are considered to be a new research methodology in Software Engineering, which allow evidence to be gathered with regard to the usefulness or effectiveness of the technology proposed in Software Engineering for the development and maintenance of software products. This is demonstrated by the growing number of publications related to SLRs that have appeared in recent years. While some tools exist that can support some or all of the activities of the SLR processes defined in (Kitchenham & Charters, 2007), these are not free. The objective of this paper is to present the SLR-Tool, which is a free tool and is available on the following website:, to be used by researchers from any discipline, and not only Software Engineering. SLR-Tool not only supports the process of performing SLRs proposed in (Kitchenham & Charters, 2007), but also provides additional functionalities such as: refining searches within the documents by applying text mining techniques; defining a classification schema in order to facilitate data synthesis; exporting the results obtained to the format of tables and charts; and exporting the references from the primary studies to the formats used in bibliographic packages such as EndNote, BibTeX or Ris. This tool has, to date, been used by members of the Alarcos Research Group and PhD students, and their perception of it is that it is both highly necessary and useful. Our purpose now is to circulate the use of SLR-Tool throughout the entire research community in order to obtain feedback from other users.


  1. Babar, M. A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. In the Empirical Software Engineering and Mesurement (ESEM 2009), Florida, USA.
  2. Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., & Jacobson, I. (1998). Unified Modeling Language User Guide: Adisson Wesley.
  3. Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 571-583.
  4. Dieste, O., & Padua, A. G. (2007). Developing Search Strategies for Detecting Relevant Experiments for Systematic Reviews. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (pp. 215-224): IEEE Computer Society.
  5. Dybå, T., Kitchenham, B. & Jørgensen, M. (2005). Evidence-based Software Engineering for Practitioners. IEEE Software, 22(1), 58-65.
  6. EPPI-Reviewer. (2010). EPPI-Center. Retrieved the 10th of February of 2010, from
  7. Genero, M., Fernandez, A. M., Nelson, H. J., Poels, G., & Piattini, M. (2009). A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of UML Models. Submitted to Journal of Database Management (JDM).
  8. JabRef. (2010). JabRef: Reference Manager. Retrieved the 11th of February of 2010, from
  9. Jacobson, I., Booch, G., & Rumbaugh, J. (1999). The Unified Software Development Process.
  10. Kitchenham, B. (2004). TR/SE-0401. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele University.
  11. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7-15.
  12. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Turner, M., Niazi, M., Linkman, S., Pretorius, R., & Budgen, D. (2009). The Impact of Limited Search Procedures for Systematic Literature Reviews - An Observer-Participant Case Study. In the Empirical Software Engineering and Mesurement (ESEM 2009), pp. 336-345.
  13. Kitchenham, B., & Charters, S. (2007). EBSE-2007-01. Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. Keele University.
  14. Larman, C. (2001). Applying UML and Patterns: An Introduction to Object-Oriented Analysis and Design and the Unified Process: Prentice-Hall.
  15. Lucene. (2009). The Apache Software Foundation. Retrieved the 12th of March of 2009, from
  16. OMG. (2003). MDA Guide (Vol. Version 1.0.1.): from
  17. Skidmore, B. (2002). CCOHTA expands the use use of bibliographic software in systematic reviews: A new role of Reference Manager. In the Annual Meeting International Society of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Green Valley Crescent, Ottawa, 18, abstract nº 289.
  18. Romero, F. P., Olivas, J. A., & Garcés, P. J. (2006). A Soft Approach to Hybrid Models for Document Clustering. In the Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-based Systems (IPMU 2006), Paris Les Cordeliers, France.
  19. TrialStat. (2010). TrialStat Corporation. Retrieved the 9th of February of 2010, from
  20. Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Budgen, D., & Brereton, O. P. (2008). Lessons learnt undertaking a large-scale systematic literature review. In the Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2008).

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Fernández-Sáez A., Genero Bocco M. and Romero F. (2010). SLR-TOOL - A Tool for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews . In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT, ISBN 978-989-8425-23-2, pages 157-166. DOI: 10.5220/0003003601570166

in Bibtex Style

author={Ana M. Fernández-Sáez and Marcela Genero Bocco and Francisco P. Romero},
title={SLR-TOOL - A Tool for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT,
TI - SLR-TOOL - A Tool for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews
SN - 978-989-8425-23-2
AU - Fernández-Sáez A.
AU - Genero Bocco M.
AU - Romero F.
PY - 2010
SP - 157
EP - 166
DO - 10.5220/0003003601570166