ArticleHeliyon2024
Selection of software agile practices using Analytic hierarchy process.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive assessment of privacy security of financial services in cloud environment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessing the Value of Omalizumab for Pediatric Asthma in China: A Multicriteria Decision Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Construction of a home-based self-management program for patients with indwelling peripherally inserted central catheter based on the IMB model.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Does management support drive sustained agile usage? a serial mediation model and cIPMA perspective.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: The increasing use of software and information technology in modern society requires that the deployment of IT solutions should be more efficient and controlled. In this sense, agile methodologies are essential to achieve this goal, but a relevant question arises: Which is the right methodology for reaching that goal? Objective: The purpose of the research was to study the prioritization of agile practices and improvement objectives in the context of software development, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. For this purpose, 42 agile practices, 16 improvement objectives, 4 organizations dedicated to software development in Colombia and 40 professionals in the area of information and communication technologies in the same country were considered. Method: ology: The methodological approach used was mixed. On the one hand, we applied a quantitative approach for the treatment of data with the AHP method and, on the other hand, a qualitative analysis by consulting experts through a digital survey to validate the prioritization of the improvement objectives. Questionpro was used as a support tool for multicriteria comparison. Results: The main results show that applying AHP allowed us to prioritize 6 improvement objectives and 5 agile practices, where it is highlighted that the prioritization does not discard the other objects of comparison but allows us to put into practice the prioritized elements to favor their progressive implementation. The non-prioritized elements could be part of future iterations of multicriteria comparison that go hand in hand with capacity development and organizational maturity models in the context of global software development. Conclusion: It is highlighted that, although there is evidence of the application of multi-criteria comparison methods in the software development industry, this work applies such methods in the context of four different agile methodologies, which translates into a precedent for the conformation of hybrid methodological approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.