As the highest level of evidence in evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews have a profound impact on clinical practice and policy-making. However, challenges remain regarding the methodological rigor and reproducibility of their results. In recent years, replication research on systematic reviews has emerged as a critical approach to ensuring evidence quality, rational allocation of research resources and advancing evidence-based medicine. This article systematically reviews the theoretical foundations and research value of replication studies in systematic reviews, with a focus on their core design principles and implementation process. Key methodological steps are discussed, including assessing the necessity of replication, determining the type of replication, pre-registration, obtaining data and code, conducting independent re-analyses, and evaluating result consistency. Meanwhile, using the childhood deworming program as an illustrative case, we further outline the practical workflow of conducting replication research and demonstrate its importance in confirming the robustness of evidence and strengthening confidence in decision-making. In addition, this study synthesizes the methodological challenges encountered throughout the entire replication process, from literature searching to data analysis, and discusses future directions involving the integration of artificial intelligence, the development of reporting standards such as PRITERS, and the establishment of supportive research infrastructures. Overall, this work aims to provide methodological guidance for the standardized conduct of replication studies and to support the high-quality development of evidence-informed practice.