For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
8
views
46
references
 Top references
cited by
0
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      133
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Systematic Literature Mapping: risk-based testing in software development Translated title: Un mapeo sistemático de literatura: pruebas basadas en riesgo en el desarrollo de software

      research-article

      Read this article at

      SciELO
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract Risk-based testing (RBT) is a type of test that helps identify product risks from the start of development, incorporating techniques that allow them to be identified and classified according to their impact and probability to create test cases for those selected requirements. However, in software development organizations the identified risks are related to the planning or cost of the project to guarantee product delivery and do not consider other risks as input for the creation of test cases and quality evaluation. of the product. Therefore, the objective of systematic mapping is based on identifying and determining the state of the art of publications related to RBT used in the software industry, in addition to metrics that incorporate or evaluate the performance of these types of tests and their benefits. The results show the proposals found on the software industry RBT and the importance of use as other types of software testing. Also, we present a preview of the Framework to support the RBT in global software development.

          Translated abstract

          Resumen Las pruebas basadas en riesgos (PBR) son un tipo de prueba que ayuda a identificar los riesgos del producto desde el inicio de desarrollo, incorporando técnicas que permitan su identificación y ser clasificados según su impacto y probabilidad, de modo que permitan crear casos de prueba para aquellos requerimientos seleccionados. Sin embargo, en las organizaciones de desarrollo software los riesgos que se identifican tienen relación con la planificación o coste del proyecto para garantizar la entrega del producto y no consideran otros riesgos como elementos de entrada para la creación de casos de prueba y evaluación de la calidad del producto. Por lo tanto, el objetivo del mapeo sistemático se basa en identificar y determinar el estado del arte de las publicaciones relacionas con PBR utilizadas en la industria software, además de métricas que incorporen o evalúen el desempeño de este tipo de pruebas y sus beneficios. Los resultados obtenidos demuestran las propuestas encontradas sobre las PBR en la industria software y la importancia de uso como otro tipo de pruebas software. Así mismo, presentamos una vista previa de Framework para soportar las PBR en el desarrollo de software global.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Book: not found

          Case Study Research : Design and Methods

          Robert K. Yin (2009)
          Providing a complete portal to the world of case study research, the Fourth Edition of Robert K. Yin’s bestselling text Case Study Research offers comprehensive coverage of the design and use of the case study method as a valid research tool. This thoroughly revised text now covers more than 50 case studies (approximately 25% new), gives fresh attention to quantitative analyses, discusses more fully the use of mixed methods research designs, and includes new methodological insights. The book’s coverage of case study research and how it is applied in practice gives readers access to exemplary case studies drawn from a wide variety of academic and applied fields. Key Features of the Fourth Edition Highlights each specific research feature through 44 boxed vignettes that feature previously published case studies Provides methodological insights to show the similarities between case studies and other social science methods Suggests a three-stage approach to help readers define the initial questions they will consider in their own case study research Covers new material on human subjects protection, the role of Institutional Review Boards, and the interplay between obtaining IRB approval and the final development of the case study protocol and conduct of a pilot case Includes an overall graphic of the entire case study research process at the beginning of the book, then highlights the steps in the process through graphics that appear at the outset of all the chapters that follow Offers in-text learning aids including “tips” that pose key questions and answers at the beginning of each chapter, practical exercises, endnotes, and a new cross-referencing table Case Study Research, Fourth Edition is ideal for courses in departments of Education, Business and Management, Nursing and Public Health, Public Administration, Anthropology, Sociology, and Political Science.
          Book 0 comments Cited 438 times – based on 0 reviews
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Benchmarking Classification Models for Software Defect Prediction: A Proposed Framework and Novel Findings

            B. Baesens, S. Lessmann, S Pietsch … (2008)
            Article 0 comments Cited 108 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Testing the PRISMA-Equity 2012 Reporting Guideline: the Perspectives of Systematic Review Authors

              Belinda J. Burford, Vivian Welch, Elizabeth Waters … (2013)
              Reporting guidelines can be used to encourage standardised and comprehensive reporting of health research. In light of the global commitment to health equity, we have previously developed and published a reporting guideline for equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012). The objectives of this study were to explore the utility of the equity extension items included in PRISMA-E 2012 from a systematic review author perspective, including facilitators and barriers to its use. This will assist in designing dissemination and knowledge translation strategies. We conducted a survey of systematic review authors to expose them to the new items in PRISMA-E 2012, establish the extent to which they had historically addressed those items in their own reviews, and gather feedback on the usefulness of the new items. Data were analysed using Microsoft Excel 2008 and Stata (version 11.2 for Mac). Of 151 respondents completing the survey, 18.5% (95% CI: 12.7% to 25.7%) had not heard of the PRISMA statement before, although 83.4% (95% CI: 77.5% to 89.3%) indicated that they plan to use PRISMA-E 2012 in the future, depending on the focus of their review. Most (68.9%; 95% CI: 60.8% to 76.2%) thought that using PRISMA-E 2012 would lead them to conduct their reviews differently. Important facilitators to using PRISMA-E 2012 identified by respondents were journal endorsement and incorporation of the elements of the guideline into systematic review software. Barriers identified were lack of time, word limits and the availability of equity data in primary research. This study has been the first to ‘road-test’ the new PRISMA-E 2012 reporting guideline and the findings are encouraging. They confirm the acceptability and potential utility of the guideline to assist review authors in reporting on equity in their reviews. The uptake and impact of PRISMA-E 2012 over time on design, conduct and reporting of primary research and systematic reviews should continue to be examined.
              Article 0 comments Cited 18 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (publisher-id): inco
                Title: Ingeniería y competitividad
                Abbreviated Title: Ing. compet.
                Publisher: Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad del Valle (Cali, Valle del Cauca, Colombia )
                ISSN (Print): 0123-3033
                ISSN (Electronic): 2027-8284
                Publication date (Print and electronic): June 2021
                Volume: 23
                Issue: 1
                Electronic Location Identifier: e9503
                Affiliations
                [1] Popayán Valle del Cauca orgnameUniversidad del Cauca orgdiv1Faculty of Electronic Engineering and Telecommunications orgdiv2Systems Engineering Program Colombia mariaisabelb@ 123456unicauca.edu.co
                Article
                Publisher ID: S0123-30332021000100007 Publisher ID: S0123-3033(21)02300100007
                DOI: 10.25100/iyc.v23i1.9503
                SO-VID: 04ab524c-df0d-43b9-8619-18842f023e36
                License:

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

                History
                Date received : 28 November 2019
                Date accepted : 03 July 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 49, Pages: 0
                Product

                SciELO Colombia

                Categories
                Subject: Articles

                Keywords: Evaluación de riesgos,Test management,Mapeo sistemático,Gestión de pruebas,Systematic mapping,Software testing,Pruebas basadas en riesgos,Risk assessment,Risk-based testing,Pruebas de software
                Data availability:
                Keywords: Evaluación de riesgos, Test management, Mapeo sistemático, Gestión de pruebas, Systematic mapping, Software testing, Pruebas basadas en riesgos, Risk assessment, Risk-based testing, Pruebas de software

                Comments

                Comment on this article