As a discipline relatively new to the conduct of systematic reviews it could be said that we are still "finding our way" in undertaking them. Still far from the norm in empirical software engineering, we are having to borrow models and guidelines from other fields and adapt them as we proceed. This is both appropriate and effective in terms of learning how to conduct a systematic review. Before we come to rely on such reviews too heavily, however, it is important to assess their reliability. We all appreciate the need to consider model credibility in our empirical work – similarly we should be considering review credibility. This talk will report on a comparison of two independent reviews intentionally undertaken with the same research issue in mind.