## 1 Introduction  
Systematic reviews are well established in the software engineering field [1]. A systematic review relies on explicit and systematic methods to collect and synthesize findings of studies that focus on a given research question [2]. It provides high-quality evidence-based syntheses for efficacy under real-world conditions and allows understanding the correlations between exposures and outcomes [3]. A systematic review also allows making recommendations on how to act based on the review findings and help support future research prioritization [4, 5]. The core features of a methodologically sound systematic review include transparency, replicability, and reliance on clear eligibility criteria [6]. Systematic reviews are usually called _secondary studies_, and the documents they synthesize are usually called _primary studies_[1]. Systematic reviews are usually resource intensive, e.g., time-consuming, as they usually require that a team of systematic reviewers, i.e., the authors of the review, work over a long period of time (approximately 67.3 weeks) to complete the review [6]. Systematic reviews are crucial for various stakeholders because they allow them to make evidence-based decisions without being overwhelmed by a large volume of research [4, 7, 8, 9, 10]. These stakeholders include patients, healthcare providers, policy makers,educators, students, insurers, systematic groups/organizations, researchers, guideline developers, journal editors, and evidence users [4; 9; 10]. Systematic reviews are increasingly popular and are conducted in various areas such as health care, social sciences, education, and computer science [2; 8]. Systematic reviews that are clearly and completely reported allow the reader to understand how they were planned and conducted, to judge the extent to which the results are reliable, to judge the reproducibility and appropriateness of the methods, and to rely on the evidence to make informed recommendations for practice or policy [8; 11]. However, systematic reviews are sometimes poorly conducted and reported, exhibit low methodological rigor and reporting quality, and may result in misleading evidence-based decision-making and in the waste of various (non)financial resources [12; 13]. To tackle these issues, reporting guidelines have been developed to support various tasks such as review reporting and assessment. The most widespread reporting guidelines usually consist of a statement paper describing how the guideline has been developed and presenting the guideline in the form of a checklist that often comprises up to thirty items that need to be reported when writing a systematic review [8]. When reporting a review, it is crucial to follow such guidelines to ensure that the review is transparent, complete, beneficial, trustworthy, and unbiased [14]. According to the EQUATOR Network registry, there are at least 529 registered reporting guidelines as of August 2022. These reporting guidelines include CONSORT, SRICTA, ARIVE and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) [15; 16]. In particular, PRISMA 2020 (the most recent version of PRISMA) was released in 2021 and comprises two checklists: the PRISMA 2020 checklist that consists of 27 items and the PRISMA 2020 for abstracts checklist that consists of 12 items. PRISMA's recommendations have been widely adopted by several areas including the health and medical area, social sciences, education, and computer science [2]. As of August 2020, PRISMA yielded citations in more than sixty thousand reports [4]. Besides, PRISMA has been endorsed by more than two hundred journals as well as systematic review organizations [4]. In this work, we focus on the PRISMA reporting guideline as it yields a more concise and transparent reporting than other reporting guidelines [17] and is suitable for the systematic reviews reporting. Several approaches have been proposed to assess the extent to which studies have adhered to reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT, COREQ, TRIPOD, STROBE, PRISMA, and STRICTA.