| 2027 | |
| [1] | , "The Landscape of Generative AI in Information Systems: A Synthesis of Secondary Reviews and Research Agendas", In e-Informatica Software Engineering Journal, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 270101, 2027.
DOI: 10.37190/e-Inf270101. Download article (PDF)Get article BibTeX file |
Authors
Aleksander Jarzębowicz, Adam Przybyłek, Jacinto Estima, Yen Ying Ng, Jakub Swacha, Beata Zielosko, Lech Madeyski, Noel Carroll, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Bartosz Marcinkowski
Abstract
Context: The post-ChatGPT surge has rapidly reframed Information Systems (IS) research and practice. As organizations and society grapple with Generative AI (GenAI) adoption, a body of secondary studies and research agendas has emerged to synthesize early evidence and chart directions for future inquiry.
Objective: This study conducts a systematic literature review of secondary studies and research agenda/roadmap papers to synthesize the state of knowledge on GenAI’s benefits and challenges in IS, and to identify future research directions.
Method: We performed a systematic search across Scopus, Web of Science, and the AIS eLibrary for publications from 2023 onwards. Following a rigorous, multi-stage screening process, we selected a final set of 28 papers (18 secondary studies and 10 research agendas) for analysis using bibliometric mapping and thematic analysis. We also conducted a quality assessment of all sources to gauge confidence in each source’s contribution to the findings.
Results: GenAI offers transformative potential to drive productivity, accelerate innovation, personalize services, and democratize access to expertise. However, its adoption is constrained by interrelated challenges: technical unreliability (hallucinations, performance drift), societal-ethical risks (bias, malicious misuse, skill erosion), and a governance vacuum (privacy, accountability, intellectual property).
Conclusions: Interpreted through a socio-technical lens, our findings reveal a persistent misalignment between GenAI’s fast-evolving technical subsystem and the slower-adapting social subsystem, positioning IS research as critical for achieving joint optimization. To bridge this gap, we propose a research agenda that reorients IS scholarship from analyzing impacts toward actively shaping the co-evolution of technical capabilities with organizational routines, societal values, and regulatory institutions – emphasizing hybrid human-AI ensembles, situated validation, design principles for probabilistic systems, and adaptive governance. For practitioners and policymakers, responsible adoption requires balancing automation with human augmentation alongside transparent governance and adaptive regulations to ensure broadly shared benefits.
Keywords
Generative AI (GenAI), Large Language Models (LLM), ChatGPT, Information Systems, Systematic Literature Review, Research Agenda, Roadmap, AI Ethics, AI Governance, Socio-Technical Systems
References
1. Y.K. Dwivedi, N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, E.L. Slade, A. Jeyaraj et al., “Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy,” International Journal of Information Management , Vol. 71, Aug. 2023, p. 102642.
2. D.O. Madsen and D.M. Toston II, “ChatGPT and Digital Transformation: A Narrative Review of Its Role in Health, Education, and the Economy,” Digital , Vol. 5, No. 3, 2025.
3. M. Wessel, M. Adam, A. Benlian, A. Majchrzak, and F. Thies, “Generative AI and its Transformative Value for Digital Platforms,” Journal of Management Information Systems , Vol. 42, No. 2, 2025, pp. 346–369.
4. K. Muszyńska and S. Marx, “AI-based functionalities for project communication management,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Information Systems Development (ISD’25) , Belgrade, Serbia, 2025.
5. D. Staegemann, M. Rizun, C. Haertel, M. Pohl, C. Daase et al., “How did the emergence of ChatGPT impact stack overflow? – a literature review,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Information Systems Development (ISD’25) , Belgrade, Serbia, 2025.
6. R. Philipp, A. Mladenow, C. Strauss, and A. Völz, “Machine Learning as a Service: Challenges in Research and Applications,” in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services , iiWAS ’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 396–406.
7. D. Bendig and A. Bräunche, “The role of artificial intelligence algorithms in information systems research: a conceptual overview and avenues for research,” Management Review Quarterly , 2024, pp. 2863––2908.
8. M. Chau and J. Xu, “An IS Research Agenda on Large Language Models: Development, Applications, and Impacts on Business and Management,” ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems , Vol. 16, No. 1, 2025, pp. 1:1–1:11.
9. R.D. Gopal, J. Li, K. Riemer, S. Sarker, P.V. Singh et al., “Inventing with machines: Generative ai and the evolving landscape of is research,” Information Systems Research , Vol. 36, No. 4, 2025, pp. 1949–1967.
10. Triando, M. Simaremare, X. Wang, and A.S.R. Prasad, “The use of generative ai tools in the inception stage of software startups,” in Software Business , E. Papatheocharous, S. Farshidi, S. Jansen, and S. Hyrynsalmi, Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 439–453.
11. V. Jackson, B. Vasilescu, D. Russo, P. Ralph, R. Prikladnicki et al., “The impact of generative ai on creativity in software development: A research agenda,” ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. , Vol. 34, No. 5, May 2025.
12. S. Lambiase, G. Catolino, F. Palomba, F. Ferrucci, and D. Russo, “Investigating the role of cultural values in adopting large language models for software engineering,” ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. , Vol. 35, No. 1, Dec. 2025.
13. D. Russo, “Navigating the complexity of generative ai adoption in software engineering,” ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. , Vol. 33, No. 5, Jun. 2024.
14. X. Wang, M.I. Attal, U. Rafiq, and S. Hubner-Benz, “Turning large language models into ai assistants for startups using prompt patterns,” in Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming – Workshops , P. Kruchten and P. Gregory, Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024, pp. 192–200.
15. K. Sainio, P. Kettunen, and P. Abrahamsson, “Realising the role of generative AI among project management professionals,” e-Informatica Software Engineering Journal , Vol. 20, No. 1, Apr. 2026, p. 260104.
16. M.W. Seymour, L.P. Ruster, K. Riemer, S. Peter, and K. Kautz, “The Challenges of Researching AI in IS: AI and the Boundaries for IS Research and AI in Information Systems: Ethical and Methodological Challenges-Reports and Contextualization of Two ACIS Panels,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 57, 2025, pp. 1375–1395.
17. M. Neumann, L. Bischof, N.E. Hinz, L. Stockmann, D. Schrader et al., “Between Policy and Practice: GenAI Adoption in Agile Software Development Teams,” in International Conference on Agile Software Development . Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2026, pp. 290–308.
18. M.A. Sami, Z. Zhang, M. Waseem, K.K. Kemell, Z. Rasheed et al., “Bridging humans and llms: Investigating human-ai collaboration in multi-agent requirements analysis for organizational ai adoption,” e-Informatica Software Engineering Journal , Vol. 20, No. 1, Jan. 2026, p. 260103.
19. W. Wysocki and M. Ochodek, “Leveraging llm-based data augmentation for automatic classification of recurring tasks in software development projects,” Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 231, 2026, p. 112641.
20. A. Czyżewski and A. Poniszewska-Maranda, “Advanced data processing algorithms and structures for technical debt management with generative artificial intelligence,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Information Systems Development (ISD’25) , Belgrade, Serbia, 2025.
21. C. Bitencourt, M.A. Santos Turine, V. Araujo Borges, and B.M.a. Nogueira, “Combining textual embeddings and graph neural networks for agile software effort estimation,” in Proceedings of the 41st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing , SAC ’26. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2026, p. 994–1001.
22. M.O. Ahmad, “Comprehension Debt in GenAI-Assisted Software Engineering Projects,” 2026. [Online]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.13277
23. D. Planötscher, X. Wang, M. Adil, P. Gregory, and S. Larimian, “Human-ai collaboration in software development activities: Perspectives of agile practitioners,” in Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming , A. Goldman, S. Marczak, G.S. Tonin, D. Bassi, T. Silva da Silva et al., Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2026, pp. 274–289.
24. J. van Bon, S. Poelmans, and Y. Wautelet, “Towards LLM-based conceptual modeling from user stories and behavior-driven development scenarios in agile requirements engineering,” in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2026) , Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 2026, accepted for publication.
25. S. Ostrowski, “From Generative Co-Design to Agentic Co-Delivery: A Conceptual Framework for Managing AI Process Debt in Scrum,” in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2026) , Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 2026, accepted for publication.
26. K. Łuczak, U. Domagała, K. Renik, and A. Nowacka, “Human Users vs. LLMs: An Empirical Study of Requirements Elicitation for Creativity Enhancement App,” in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2026) , Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 2026, accepted for publication.
27. L. Hughes, T. Malik, S. Dettmer, A.S. Al-Busaidi, and Y.K. Dwivedi, “Reimagining Higher Education: Navigating the Challenges of Generative AI Adoption,” Information Systems Frontiers , 2025.
28. C. Goldberg, R.D. Balicer, M. Bhat, D. Blumenthal, R.W. Brendel et al., “The missing dimension in clinical ai: Making hidden values visible,” NEJM AI , Vol. 3, No. 2, 2026, p. AIp2501266.
29. M.M. Li, B.Y. Reis, A. Rodman, T. Cai, N. Dagan et al., “Scaling medical ai across clinical contexts,” Nature Medicine , Vol. 32, No. 2, Feb 2026, pp. 439–448.
30. J.P. Chakko, “Governing through interpretation: Ai-augmented sensemaking in agile delivery teams,” in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2026) , Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 2026, accepted for publication.
31. Y.K. Dwivedi, L. Hughes, E. Ismagilova, G. Aarts, C. Coombs et al., “Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy,” International Journal of Information Management , Vol. 57, 2021, p. 101994.
32. Y. Huang, C. Arora, W.C. Huong, T. Kanij, A. Madugalla et al., “Ethical concerns of generative ai and mitigation strategies: A systematic mapping study,” Applied Soft Computing , Vol. 193, 2026, p. 114789.
33. O. Krancher, P. Nagbøl, and O. Müller, “The danish business authority’s approach to the ongoing evaluation of ai systems,” MIS Quarterly Executive , Vol. 24, No. 2, 2025, pp. 137–150.
34. E. Zamani and A. Rousaki, “Risk, artificial intelligence, and the governance of migration: A critical discourse analysis of the eu ai act,” Information Technology for Development , Vol. 32, 2026. [Online]. https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/4658503
35. V.C. Storey, W.T. Yue, J.L. Zhao, and R. Lukyanenko, “Generative Artificial Intelligence: Evolving Technology, Growing Societal Impact, and Opportunities for Information Systems Research,” Information Systems Frontiers , Vol. 27, Feb. 2025, pp. 2081––2102.
36. P.G. Poličar, M. Špendl, T. Curk, and B. Zupan, “Automated assignment grading with large language models: insights from a bioinformatics course,” Bioinformatics , Vol. 41, No. Supplement 1, 07 2025, pp. i21–i29.
37. W. Kucharska and M. Kucharski, “Agile culture, collective human intelligence and ai adoption: Gender and sectoral perspectives on augmented intelligence in europe,” International Journal of Information Management Data Insights , Vol. 6, No. 1, 2026, p. 100406.
38. X. Wei, N. Kumar, and H. Zhang, “Addressing bias in generative AI: Challenges and research opportunities in information management,” Information & Management , Vol. 62, No. 2, Mar. 2025, p. 104103.
39. J.M. Mira, “Symbols versus connections: 50 years of artificial intelligence,” Neurocomputing , Vol. 71, No. 4, 2008, pp. 671–680, neural Networks: Algorithms and Applications 50 Years of Artificial Intelligence: a Neuronal Approach.
40. P. Smolensky, “Connectionist AI, symbolic AI, and the brain,” Artificial Intelligence Review , Vol. 1, No. 2, 1987, pp. 95–109.
41. J.L. Elman, “Finding structure in time,” Cognitive Science , Vol. 14, No. 2, 1990, pp. 179–211.
42. S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long Short-Term Memory,” Neural Computation , Vol. 9, No. 8, 1997, pp. 1735–1780.
43. Y. Yang, X. Xia, D. Lo, and J. Grundy, “A survey on deep learning for software engineering,” ACM Computing Surveys , Vol. 54, No. 10s, Sep. 2022.
44. T. Mikolov, K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean, “Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781 , 2013.
45. M.E. Peters, M. Neumann, M. Iyyer, M. Gardner, C. Clark et al., “Deep contextualized word representations,” in Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies , 2018, pp. 2227–2237.
46. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones et al., “Attention is all you need,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , Vol. 30, 2017.
47. J. Yang, H. Jin, R. Tang, X. Han, Q. Feng et al., “Harnessing the Power of LLMs in Practice: A Survey on ChatGPT and Beyond,” ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data , Vol. 18, No. 6, jul 2024, pp. 1–32.
48. J. Devlin, M.W. Chang, K. Lee, and K. Toutanova, “BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding,” in Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies , Vol. 1 (Long and Short Papers), 2019, pp. 4171–4186.
49. T.B. Brown, B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. Kaplan et al., “Language models are few-shot learners – special version,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. Balcan, and H. Lin, Eds., Vol. 33, 2020, pp. 1877–1901.
50. L. Ouyang, J. Wu, X. Jiang, D. Almeida, C.L. Wainwright et al., “Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , Vol. 35, No. NeurIPS, 2022, pp. 27 730–27 744.
51. M. Fu and C. Tantithamthavorn, “LineVul: A Transformer-based Line-Level Vulnerability Prediction,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories . New York, NY, USA: ACM, may 2022, pp. 608–620.
52. J. White, Q. Fu, S. Hays, M. Sandborn, C. Olea et al., “A Prompt Pattern Catalog to Enhance Prompt Engineering with ChatGPT,” in Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs , PLoP ’23. USA: The Hillside Group, 2023.
53. J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, B. Ichter et al., “Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , Vol. 35, No. NeurIPS, 2022, pp. 24 824–24 837.
54. J. Sun, C. Zheng, E. Xie, Z. Liu, R. Chu et al., “A survey of reasoning with foundation models: Concepts, methodologies, and outlook,” ACM Computing Surveys , Vol. 57, No. 11, Jun. 2025, pp. 1–43.
55. A. Roychoudhury, “A Year in TOSEM: New Research Award, Agentic AI Special Issue and Much More,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology , Vol. 35, No. 1, Dec. 2025, pp. 1–3.
56. H. Grabowski, “A modular multi-agent LLM architecture for text-to-diagram generation and user-guided refinement,” e-Informatica Software Engineering Journal , Vol. 20, No. 1, May 2026, p. 260109, available online: 13 May 2026.
57. S. Yazdani, A. Singh, N. Saxena, Z. Wang, A. Palikhe et al., “Generative AI in depth: A survey of recent advances, model variants, and real-world applications,” Journal of Big Data , Vol. 12, No. 1, Oct. 2025, p. 230.
58. M. Albashrawi, “Generative AI for Decision-Making: A multidisciplinary perspective,” Journal of Innovation & Knowledge , Vol. 10, No. 4, 2025, p. 100751.
59. R. Bommasani et al., “On the opportunities and risks of foundation models,” arXiv:2108.07258 , 2021.
60. S. Alter, “Defining information systems as work systems: implications for the IS field,” European Journal of Information Systems , Vol. 17, No. 5, 2008, pp. 448–469.
61. K. Lyytinen and M. Newman, “Explaining information systems change: a punctuated socio-technical change model,” European Journal of Information Systems , Vol. 17, No. 6, 2008, pp. 589–613.
62. W.J. Orlikowski and C.S. Iacono, “Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact,” Information Systems Research , Vol. 12, No. 2, 2001, pp. 121–134.
63. G. Walsham, “Are We Making a Better World with ICTs? Reflections on a Future Agenda for the IS Field,” Journal of Information Technology , Vol. 27, No. 2, 2012, pp. 87–93.
64. E. Mumford, Designing human systems for new technology : the ETHICS method . Manchester: Manchester Business School, 1983.
65. I. Benbasat and R.W. Zmud, “The identity crisis within the IS discipline: Defining and communicating the discipline’s core properties,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 27, No. 2, 06 2003, pp. 183–194.
66. F.D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 13, No. 3, 09 1989, pp. 319–340.
67. G. Vial, “Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda,” in Managing Digital Transformation: Understanding the Strategic Process , A. Hinterhuber, T. Vescovi, and F. Checchinato, Eds. London: Routledge, 2021, pp. 13–66.
68. M. Cavalcante, J. Varajão, and L. Silva Rodrigues, “Digital transformation initiatives: Motivations, objectives, and strategies,” Telematics and Informatics Reports , Vol. 19, 2025, p. 100246.
69. T. Butler, D. Gozman, and K. Lyytinen, “The regulation of and through information technology: Towards a conceptual ontology for is research,” Journal of Information Technology , Vol. 38, No. 2, 2023, pp. 86–107.
70. R. Hirschheim and H.K. Klein, “Four Paradigms of Information Systems Development,” Communications of the ACM , Vol. 32, No. 10, 1989, p. 1199–1216.
71. M.L. Markus, “Power, politics, and mis implementation,” Communications of the ACM , Vol. 26, No. 6, 6 1983, p. 430–444.
72. M.S. Pang, A. Kankanhalli, M. Aanestad, S. Ram, and L.M. Maruping, “Digital technologies and the advancement of social justice: A framework and agenda,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 48, No. 4, 12 2024, pp. 1591–1610.
73. N. Berente, B. Gu, J. Recker, and R. Santhanam, “Managing Artificial Intelligence,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 45, No. 3, 09 2021, pp. 1433–1450.
74. M. Marabelli, S. Newell, M. Ahuja, and B. Galliers, “Are immersive platforms the future of work? the role of generative AI and DEI considerations,” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems , Vol. 34, No. 4, 2025, p. 101943.
75. Y. Yoo, “Computing in everyday life: A call for research on experiential computing,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 34, No. 2, 06 2010, pp. 213–231.
76. N. Iivari, M. Kinnula, T. Molin-Juustila, and L. Kuure, “Exclusions in social inclusion projects: Struggles in involving children in digital technology development,” Information Systems Journal , Vol. 28, No. 6, 2018, pp. 1020–1048.
77. A. Majchrzak, M.L. Markus, and J. Wareham, “Designing for Digital Transformation: Lessons for Information Systems Research from the Study of ICT and Societal Challenges,” Management Information Systems Quarterly , Vol. 40, No. 2, 06 2016, pp. 267–277.
78. S. Wass, E. Thygesen, and S. Purao, “Principles to facilitate social inclusion for design-oriented research,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 24, No. 5, 2023, pp. 1204–1247.
79. B. Boehm, “A view of 20th and 21st century software engineering,” in Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering , ICSE ’06. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2006, p. 12–29.
80. H. Sharp and H. Robinson, “Some social factors of software engineering: the maverick, community and technical practices,” in Proceedings of the 2005 Workshop on Human and Social Factors of Software Engineering , HSSE ’05. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2005, p. 1–6.
81. D. Russo, S. Baltes, N.v. Berkel, P. Avgeriou, F. Calefato et al., “Generative AI in Software Engineering Must Be Human-Centered: The Copenhagen Manifesto,” Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 216, 2024, p. 112115.
82. Z. Zheng, K. Ning, Q. Zhong, J. Chen, W. Chen et al., “Towards an understanding of large language models in software engineering tasks,” Empirical Software Engineering , Vol. 30, No. 2, 2025, p. 50.
83. X. Hou, Y. Zhao, Y. Liu, Z. Yang, K. Wang et al., “Large language models for software engineering: A systematic literature review,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology , Vol. 33, No. 8, 2024, pp. 1–79.
84. U. Karlovs-Karlovskis, “Generative artificial intelligence use in optimising software engineering process: A systematic literature review,” Applied Computer Systems , Vol. 29, No. 1, 2024, pp. 68–77.
85. A. Fan, B. Gokkaya, M. Harman, M. Lyubarskiy, S. Sengupta et al., “Large Language Models for Software Engineering: Survey and Open Problems,” in 2023 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: Future of Software Engineering (ICSE-FoSE) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 31–53.
86. T. Bazzan, B. Olojo, P. Majda, T. Kelly, M. Yilmaz et al., “Analysing the role of Generative AI in Software Engineering-Results from an MLR,” in European Conference on Software Process Improvement . Springer, 2024, pp. 163–180.
87. H. Cornide-Reyes, D. Monsalves, E. Durán, F. Silva-Aravena, and J. Morales, “Generative Artificial Intelligence in Agile Software Development Processes: A Literature Review Focused on User eXperience,” in International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction , A. Coman and S. Vasilache, Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 228–246.
88. Y. Yao, J. Duan, K. Xu, Y. Cai, Z. Sun et al., “A survey on large language model (LLM) security and privacy: The good, the bad, and the ugly,” High-Confidence Computing , Vol. 4, No. 2, 2024, p. 100211.
89. H. Xu, S. Wang, N. Li, K. Wang, Y. Zhao et al., “Large language models for cyber security: A systematic literature review,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology , 2024, just Accepted.
90. I. Hasanov, S. Virtanen, A. Hakkala, and J. Isoaho, “Application of large language models in cybersecurity: A systematic literature review,” IEEE Access , Vol. 12, 2024, pp. 176 751–176 778.
91. Y. Chen, W. Sun, C. Fang, Z. Chen, Y. Ge et al., “Security of language models for code: A systematic literature review,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology , 2025, just Accepted.
92. F. Qi, Y. Hou, N. Lin, S. Bao, and N. Xu, “A survey of testing techniques based on large language models,” in Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Computer and Multimedia Technology . New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024, pp. 280–284.
93. J. Wang, Y. Huang, C. Chen, Z. Liu, S. Wang et al., “Software testing with large language models: Survey, landscape, and vision,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering , Vol. 50, No. 4, 2024, pp. 911–936.
94. H. Cheng, J.H. Husen, Y. Lu, T. Racharak, N. Yoshioka et al., “Generative AI for requirements engineering: A systematic literature review,” Software: Practice and Experience , Vol. 56, No. 2, 2025, pp. 141–170.
95. A. Hemmat, M. Sharbaf, S. Kolahdouz-Rahimi, K. Lano, and S.Y. Tehrani, “Research directions for using LLM in software requirement engineering: A systematic review,” Frontiers in Computer Science , Vol. 7, 2025, p. 1519437.
96. A. Nguyen-Duc, B. Cabrero-Daniel, A. Przybylek, C. Arora, D. Khanna et al., “Generative artificial intelligence for software engineering—a research agenda,” Software: Practice and Experience , Vol. 55, No. 11, 2025, pp. 1806–1843.
97. I. Ahmed, A. Aleti, H. Cai, A. Chatzigeorgiou, P. He et al., “Artificial intelligence for software engineering: The journey so far and the road ahead,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology , Vol. 34, No. 5, 2025, pp. 1–27.
98. B. Kitchenham, S. Charters et al., “Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering,” Technical Report EBSE 2007-001 , 2007.
99. P. Brereton, B. Kitchenham, D. Budgen, M. Turner, and M. Khalil, “Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain,” Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 80, No. 4, 2007, pp. 571–583.
100. W. Bandara, S. Miskon, and E. Fielt, “A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems,” in ECIS 2011 Proceedings [19th European Conference on Information Systems] , M. Rossi and J. Nandhakumar, Eds. AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) / Association for Information Systems, 2011, pp. 1–13. [Online]. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/42184/
101. B. Kitchenham, L. Madeyski, and D. Budgen, “SEGRESS: Software Engineering Guidelines for REporting Secondary Studies,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering , Vol. 49, No. 3, 2023, pp. 1273–1298.
102. A. Ampatzoglou, S. Bibi, P. Avgeriou, M. Verbeek, and A. Chatzigeorgiou, “Identifying, categorizing and mitigating threats to validity in software engineering secondary studies,” Information and Software Technology , Vol. 106, 2019, pp. 201–230.
103. B. Kitchenham, D. Budgen, and P. Brereton, Evidence-Based Software Engineering and Systematic Reviews . CRC Press, 2016.
104. B. Kitchenham, L. Madeyski, and D. Budgen, “How Should Software Engineering Secondary Studies Include Grey Material?” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering , Vol. 49, No. 2, 2023, pp. 872–882.
105. D. Budgen, P. Brereton, S. Drummond, and N. Williams, “Reporting systematic reviews: Some lessons from a tertiary study,” Information and Software Technology , Vol. 95, 2018, pp. 62–74.
106. A. Harden, J. Thomas, M. Cargo, J. Harris, T. Pantoja et al., “Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series—paper 5: Methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , Vol. 97, 2018, pp. 70–78.
107. B. Kitchenham, “Procedures for performing systematic reviews,” Keele University Technical Report TR/SE-040 , 2004.
108. N.R. Haddaway, M.J. Page, C.C. Pritchard, and L.A. McGuinness, “PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis,” Campbell Systematic Reviews , Vol. 18, No. 2, 2022, p. e1230.
109. J.F. Wolfswinkel, E. Furtmueller, and C.P.M. Wilderom, “Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature,” European Journal of Information Systems , Vol. 22, No. 1, 1 2013, pp. 45–55.
110. United Nations, International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) , revision 4 ed. New York, NY: United Nations, 2008.
111. X. Meng, X. Yan, K. Zhang, D. Liu, X. Cui et al., “The application of large language models in medicine: A scoping review,” iScience , Vol. 27, No. 5, May 2024, publisher: Elsevier.
112. A. Srivastava, M. Marabelli, D. Blanch-Hartigan, J. Moriarty, E. Carey et al., “The Present and Future of AI: Ethical Issues and Research Opportunities,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 56, No. 1, Mar. 2025, pp. 255–273.
113. F. Lareyre, B. Nasr, A. Chaudhuri, G. Di Lorenzo, M. Carlier et al., “Comprehensive Review of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in Vascular Surgery,” EJVES Vascular Forum , Vol. 60, Jan. 2023, pp. 57–63.
114. K. Ouanes, “Generative artificial intelligence in healthcare: current status and future directions,” Italian Journal of Medicine , Vol. 18, No. 3, Aug. 2024, company: Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) Distributor: Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) Label: Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) Number: 3 Publisher: PAGEPress Publications.
115. M. Beheshti, I.E. Toubal, K. Alaboud, M. Almalaysha, O.B. Ogundele et al., “Evaluating the Reliability of ChatGPT for Health-Related Questions: A Systematic Review,” Informatics , Vol. 12, No. 1, Mar. 2025, p. 9.
116. V.C.F. Bellanda, M.L.d. Santos, D.A. Ferraz, R. Jorge, and G.B. Melo, “Applications of ChatGPT in the diagnosis, management, education, and research of retinal diseases: a scoping review,” International Journal of Retina and Vitreous , Vol. 10, No. 1, Oct. 2024, p. 79.
117. J. Pool, M. Indulska, and S. Sadiq, “Large Language Models and Generative AI in telehealth: a responsible use lens,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association , Vol. 31, No. 9, Sep. 2024, pp. 2125–2136.
118. M. Li and A.W. Guenier, “ChatGPT and Health Communication: A Systematic Literature Review,” International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC) , Vol. 15, No. 1, 2024, pp. 1–26.
119. A. Bracken, C. Reilly, A. Feeley, E. Sheehan, K. Merghani et al., “Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Powered Documentation Systems in Healthcare: A Systematic Review,” Journal of Medical Systems , Vol. 49, No. 1, Feb. 2025, p. 28.
120. B. Mohammad, T. Supti, M. Alzubaidi, H. Shah, T. Alam et al., “The Pros and Cons of Using ChatGPT in Medical Education: A Scoping Review,” in ICIMTH (International Conference on Informatics, Management, and Technology in Healthcare) for the year 2023 . IOS Press, 2023, pp. 644–647.
121. S. Feuerriegel, J. Hartmann, C. Janiesch, and P. Zschech, “Generative AI,” Business & Information Systems Engineering , Vol. 66, No. 1, Jan. 2024, pp. 111–126. [Online]. https://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol66/iss1/7
122. I. Maita, S. Saide, A.M. Putri, and D. Muwardi, “Pros and Cons of Artificial Intelligence–ChatGPT Adoption in Education Settings: A Literature Review and Future Research Agendas,” IEEE Engineering Management Review , Vol. 52, No. 3, Jun. 2024, pp. 27–42.
123. D. Onatayo, A. Onososen, A.O. Oyediran, H. Oyediran, V. Arowoiya et al., “Generative AI Applications in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction: Trends, Implications for Practice, Education & Imperatives for Upskilling—A Review,” Architecture , Vol. 4, No. 4, 2024, pp. 877–902.
124. J. Schneider, “Explainable Generative AI (GenXAI): a survey, conceptualization, and research agenda,” Artificial Intelligence Review , Vol. 57, No. 11, Sep. 2024, p. 289.
125. Y.K. Dwivedi, L. Hughes, M.S. Al-Ahmadi, V. Dutot, S.Q. Ahmed et al., “GenAI’s Impact on Global IT Management: A Multi-Expert Perspective and Research Agenda,” Journal of Global Information Technology Management , Vol. 28, No. 1, 2025, pp. 49–63.
126. S. Jarvenpaa and S. Klein, “New Frontiers in Information Systems Theorizing: Human-gAI Collaboration,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 25, No. 1, Jan. 2024, pp. 110–121.
127. J. Haase, W. Kremser, H. Leopold, J. Mendling, L. Onnasch et al., “Interdisciplinary Directions for Researching the Effects of Robotic Process Automation and Large Language Models on Business Processes,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 54, No. 1, Apr. 2024, pp. 579–604.
128. F. Nah, J. Cai, R. Zheng, and N. Pang, “An Activity System-based Perspective of Generative AI: Challenges and Research Directions,” AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction , Vol. 15, No. 3, Sep. 2023, pp. 247–267.
129. T. Clear, A. Cajander, A. Clear, R. McDermott, M. Daniels et al., “AI Integration in the IT Professional Workplace: A Scoping Review and Interview Study with Implications for Education and Professional Competencies,” in 2024 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education , ITiCSE 2024. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, Jan. 2025, pp. 34–67.
130. M. Sigala, K.B. Ooi, G.W.H. Tan, E.C.X. Aw, T.H. Cham et al., “ChatGPT and service: opportunities, challenges, and research directions,” Journal of Service Theory and Practice , Vol. 34, No. 5, Jul. 2024, pp. 726–737.
131. J. Laine, M. Minkkinen, and M. Mäntymäki, “Understanding the Ethics of Generative AI: Established and New Ethical Principles,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 56, No. 1, Mar. 2025, pp. 1–25.
132. C. Mambile and F. Ishengoma, “Exploring the non-linear trajectories of technology adoption in the digital age,” Technological Sustainability , Vol. 3, No. 4, Jun. 2024, pp. 428–448, publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited.
133. I. Ghebrehiwet, N. Zaki, R. Damseh, and M.S. Mohamad, “Revolutionizing personalized medicine with generative AI: a systematic review,” Artificial Intelligence Review , Vol. 57, No. 5, Apr. 2024, p. 128.
134. E. Gumusel, “A literature review of user privacy concerns in conversational chatbots: A social informatics approach: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , Vol. 76, No. 1, 2025, pp. 121–154.
135. National Institute of Standards and Technology, “Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0),” 2023. [Online]. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1