This study employed insider research and reflective practice to investigate exchanges across the research-policy interface to understand the practice of producing policy-relevant systematic reviews. Interviewees came from 11 systematic reviews or review programmes which spanned four models of policy-relevant reviews and between them provided evidence for understanding policy problems, comparing policy options, or implementing policy decisions. No review methodology was found to be uniquely appropriate for policy-relevant systematic reviews. It was the mutual engagement across the research-policy interface that made the reviews policy-relevant. This involved thinking about the issues and seeing them from multiple viewpoints to identify and shape questions; this prompted implicit or explicit value-driven debates. The intellectual work to shape a policy-relevant systematic review is an iterative, collective endeavour that requires partners from either side of the policy-research interface to engage with the unfamiliar, listen, challenge and co-construct questions and answers.

中文翻译：

---

制作与政策相关的系统评价：浏览政策研究界面

本研究采用内部研究和反思实践来调查跨研究政策界面的交流，以了解制作与政策相关的系统评价的实践。受访者来自 11 个系统评论或评论计划，这些评论或评论计划涵盖四种与政策相关的评论模型，它们之间提供了理解政策问题、比较政策选择或实施政策决定的证据。没有发现特别适合与政策相关的系统评价的评价方法。正是跨研究政策界面的相互参与使评论与政策相关。这涉及思考问题并从多个角度看待它们以识别和塑造问题；这引发了隐含或明确的价值驱动辩论。