A systematic literature review published from 2009 to June 2016 identified 33 primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors out of 4622 retrieved papers¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? A pre-defined review protocol applied across seven digital libraries yielded 33 included primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors. → Diego Dermeval 2018
Evidence¶
Diego Dermeval 2018¶
Diego Dermeval, Ranilson Paiva, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, Julita Vassileva, Daniel Borges. (2018). Authoring Tools for Designing Intelligent Tutoring Systems: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0157-9
q3 · i? · review · r3
Systematic literature review following the Kitchenham and Charters protocol, with search, selection and extraction aided by the StArt tool. The review reports that "33 papers are finally included after applying our exclusion and inclusion criteria" from 4622 retrieved papers, covering 2009 to June 2016.
"Among the 4622 papers retrieved from seven digital libraries published from 2009 to June 2016, 33 papers are finally included after applying our exclusion and inclusion criteria."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- ITS authoring tool research is concentrated in academic settings, and 45.45% of included papers conducted empirical studies while illustrative scenarios were the most common method — related
- The review finds empirical evidence that ITS authoring tools benefit non-programmer authors mainly in effectiveness, efficiency, quality of authored artifacts, and usability — related
- Model-tracing/cognitive tutors and example-tracing tutors are the predominant ITS types designed with authoring tools, together accounting for almost 40% of included studies — related
- The special issue's accepted papers illustrate progress toward enabling non-programmer teachers and trainers to author adaptive systems — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
slr-2009-2016-its-authoring-33-studies |
title |
A systematic literature review published from 2009 to June 2016 identified 33 primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors out of 4622 retrieved papers |
description |
A systematic literature review published from 2009 to June 2016 identified 33 primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors out of 4622 retrieved papers |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — diego-dermeval-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.