Conducting a systematic literature review (SLR) is difficult and time-consuming for an experienced researcher, and even more so for a novice graduate student. With a better understanding of the most common difficulties in the SLR process, mentors will be better prepared to guide novices through the process. This understanding will help researchers have more realistic expectations of the SLR process and will help mentors guide novices through its planning, execution, and documentation phases. Consequently, the objectives of this work are to identify the most difficult and time-consuming phases of the SLR process. Using data from two sources -52 responses to an online survey sent to all authors of SLRs published in software engineering venues and qualitative experience reports from 8 PhD students who conducted SLRs as part of a course -we identified specific difficulties related to each phase of the SLR process. Our findings highlight the importance of planning, teamwork, and mentoring by an experienced researcher throughout the process. The paper also identifies implications for the teaching of the SLR process.

Modern European beekeeping is facing numerous challenges due to a variety of factors, mainly related to globalisation, agrochemical pollution and environmental changes. In addition to this, new pathogens threaten the health of European honeybees. In that context, correct colony management should encompass a wider vision, where productivity aspects are linked to a One Health approach in order to protect honeybees, humans and the environment. This paper describes a novel tool to be applied in beekeeping operations: good beekeeping practices (GBPs). The authors ranked a list of GBPs scored against their importance and validated by an international team, including researchers, national animal health authorities and international beekeepers' associations. These activities were carried out in the project 'BPRACTICES', approved within the transnational call of the European Research Area Network on Sustainable Animal Production Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 38 (3) 3 3/27 (ERA-NET SusAn) in the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme of the European Union. This study, created through an international collaboration, aims to present an innovative and implementable approach, similar to applications already adopted in other livestock production systems.

Context: With the increasing popularity of the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) process, there is also an increasing need for tool support. Objective:The goal of this work was to consult the software engineering researchers who conduct SLRs to identify and prioritize the necessary SLR tool features. Method: To gather information required to address this goal, we invited SLR authors to participate in an interactive 2-hour workshop structured around the Nominal Group Technique. Results: The workshop outcomes indicated that Search & Selection and Collaboration are the two highest priority tool features. The results also showed that most of the high-priority features are not well-supported in current tools. Conclusion: These results support and extend the results of prior work. SLR tool authors can use these findings to guide future development efforts.

Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are an important tool used by software engineering researchers to summarize the state of knowledge about a particular topic. Currently, SLR authors must perform the difficult, time-consuming task in largely manual fashion. To identify barriers faced by SLR authors, we conducted an interactive community workshop prior to ESEM'13. Workshop participants generated a total of 100 ideas that, through group discussions, formed 37 composite barriers to the SLR process. Further analysis reveals the barriers relate to latent themes regarding the SLR process, primary studies, the practitioner community, and tooling. This paper describes the barriers identified during the workshop along with a ranking of those barriers that is based on votes by workshop attendees. The paper concludes by describing the impact of these barriers on three important constituencies: SLR Methodology Researchers, SLR Authors and SLR consumers.