A systematic review often involves consulting experts. Usually that stage is prior to formulating the questions and topic of the review - using a panel. However you can incorporate expert comments at other stages of the review if there is some rationale and systematic process (ideally it should be something replicable by others and transparent).

In that sense it’s fine to mention in the revised review that you are responding to reviewer’ comments.

There are many flaws with systematic reviews though - one is that the way in which you understand and approach the problem is something you can’t really decide by reviewing the evidence.

For example if you are studying schools (your setting) it might be that a Foucauldian perspective is a good way to understand trust - but this isn’t something that a review would tell you because choice of perspective is a way of seeing - it’s a more fundamental question (you could take a Bourdieusian perspective on the same setting for instance or understand trust in terms of relations of exchange).

I’ve written about this here (among other places)

https://www.cebma.org/wp-content/uploads/Morrell-2008.pdf

good luck 😉

Thanks a lot for the input Kevin Morrell

Look at these papers

Article Systematic Reviews: What Do You Need to Know to Get Started?

Article Defining the process to literature searching in systematic r...