Producing policy relevant systematic reviews: navigating the policy-research interface. (1st June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Oliver, Sandra; Bangpan,, Mukdarut; Dickson, Kelly
• Is Part Of: Evidence & policy. Volume 14:Number 2(2018)
• Page Start: 197
• Page End: 220
• Publication Date: 2018-06-01
• Subjects: systematic review -- research synthesis -- framing -- policy relevance; Policy sciences -- Periodicals; Social policy -- Research -- Periodicals; Public welfare -- Research -- Periodicals; Social service -- Decision making -- Periodicals; 320.6
• DOI: 10.1332/174426417X14987303892442
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1744-2648

Abstract

Abstract : 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. Key messages Policy relevant systematic reviews are shaped by: <list list-type="bullet"> Horizon scanning, consulting or setting research agendas with policy makers; Postgraduate students combining research training with employment backgrounds in policy; Knowledge brokering between worlds of policy and research; and/or Lateral thinking, exploratory thoughtprovoking discussion and constructive conflict.