A meta-survey of comparative studies on ontology development methodologies

This study presents a comprehensive meta-survey of 45 comparative studies on ontology development methodologies (ODMs), providing a structured and multidimensional overview of three decades of research. A systematic literature review (SLR) was employed to ensure a rigorous and replicable process for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant studies. Conducted in two stages, the review first curated core comparative works and then performed detailed qualitative and quantitative analyses, following established SLR frameworks adapted to the objectives of this meta-analysis. The analysis identified 106 distinct ODMs discussed across the selected studies, revealing a marked rise in publication activity between 2014 and 2024, with notable contributions from Malaysia, Germany, the United Kingdom, and India. Most works were published in journals, with 74% available as open access. Commonly evaluated methodologies included METHONTOLOGY, Uschold and King, and Grüninger and Fox, recognized for their influence and ease of use. However, the comparative studies exhibited wide variation in scope, evaluation criteria, and methodological rigor—most relying primarily on qualitative assessments, with only 13% incorporating quantitative analysis. Persistent challenges include limited tool support, incomplete lifecycle coverage, and low accessibility for non-technical users. This is the first comprehensive meta-analysis of comparative ODM research. It introduces an 11-category comparative framework and a revised taxonomy for classifying ODMs based on methodological features. By consolidating fragmented insights, this study offers a unified reference for ontology researchers and practitioners, guiding the selection and design of more systematic, scalable, and user-centric ODMs.