Context : Several tertiary studies have criticized the reporting of software engineering secondary studies. Objective : Our objective is to identify guidelines for reporting software engineering (SE) secondary studies which would address problems observed in the reporting of software engineering systematic reviews (SRs). Method : We review the criticisms of SE secondary studies and identify the major areas of concern. We assess the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement as a possible solution to the need for SR reporting guidelines, based on its status as the reporting guideline recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration whose SR guidelines were a major input to the guidelines developed for SE. We report its advantages and limitations in the context of SE secondary studies. We also assess reporting guidelines for mapping studies and qualitative reviews, and compare their structure and content with that of PRISMA 2020. Results : Previous tertiary studies confirm that reports of secondary studies are of variable quality. However, ad hoc recommendations that amend reporting standards may result in unnecessary duplication of text. We confirm that the PRISMA 2020 statement addresses SE reporting problems, but is mainly oriented to quantitative reviews, mixed-methods reviews and meta-analyses. However, we show that the PRISMA 2020 item definitions can be extended to cover the information needed to report mapping studies and qualitative reviews. Conclusions : In this paper and its Supplementary Material, we present and illustrate an integrated set of guidelines called SEGRESS (Software Engineering Guidelines for REporting Secondary Studies), suitable for quantitative systematic reviews (building upon PRISMA 2020), mapping studies (PRISMA-ScR), and qualitative reviews (ENTREQ and RAMESES), that addresses reporting problems found in current SE SRs.

中文翻译：

---

SEGRESS：报告中学研究的软件工程指南

背景：一些高等教育研究批评了软件工程二次研究的报告。目标：我们的目标是确定报告软件工程 (SE) 二次研究的指南，这些指南将解决在软件工程系统评论 (SR) 报告中观察到的问题。方法：我们回顾了对 SE 二次研究的批评，并确定了主要关注领域。我们评估 PRISMA 2020（系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目）声明作为满足 SR 报告指南需求的可能解决方案，基于其作为 Cochrane 协作组织推荐的报告指南的地位，其 SR 指南是主要输入为 SE 制定的指南。我们在 SE 二次研究的背景下报告了它的优点和局限性。我们还评估映射研究和定性审查的报告指南，并将其结构和内容与 PRISMA 2020 进行比较。结果：先前的高等教育研究证实，二级研究的报告质量参差不齐。然而，修正报告标准的特别建议可能会导致不必要的文本重复。我们确认 PRISMA 2020 声明解决了 SE 报告问题，但主要面向定量审查、混合方法审查和元分析。但是，我们表明可以扩展 PRISMA 2020 项目定义以涵盖报告映射研究和定性审查所需的信息。结论：在本文及其补充材料中，我们提出并说明了一套称为 SEGRESS（报告二级研究的软件工程指南）的综合指南，适用于定量系统评价（基于 PRISMA 2020）、映射研究 (PRISMA-ScR)和定性审查（ENTREQ 和 RAMESES），解决当前 SE SR 中发现的报告问题。