PE Guidelines logo
Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines Around The World

Country/Region: China Mainland

Published PE Recommendations
China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (2011)
PDF in Chinese

Published PE Recommendations Source:

Additional Information:

Last Webpage Update: Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Published PE Recommendations Key Features:

Key Features:  
Title and year of the documentChina Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (2011) 
Affiliation of authorsPeking University, Fudan University, China Pharmaceutical University, Tianjin University, Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MHRSS), PLA 306 Hospital, and many others 
Purpose of the documentProvide scientific basis for researchers to conduct economic analysis of medicines for pricing and reimbursement policy making in China 
Standard reporting format includedYes 
Target audience of funding/ author's interestsBoth public and private payers, healthcare industries, clinicians, and research communities 
PerspectivePrimarily society, followed by payers, employer, health care provider, patients 
IndicationPrimarily approved indications 
Target populationBoth insured and uninsured populations, defined by inclusion and exclusion criteria 
Subgroup analysisYes 
Choice of comparatorPrimarily standard care or conventional treatment 
Time horizonLong enough to capture the major costs and outcomes related to the interventions. 
Assumptions requiredYes 
Preferred analytical techniquePrimarily CUA 
Costs to be includedPrimarily direct medical costs, followed by direct non-medical cost and indirect cost if data available. 
Source of costsPrimarily from Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MHRSS), Ministry of Health, and National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) 
ModelingYes, both decision-tree and econometric frameworks 
Systematic review of evidencesYes 
Preference for effectiveness over efficacyYes. If efficacy is the only indicator available, it should be converted into effectiveness by means of appropriate models. 
Preferred outcome measureFinal Endpoints; QALY; WTP 
Preferred method to derive utilityThree direct valuation methods such as SG (Standard Gamble), TTO (Time Trade-Off), and VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) are recommended. Four indirect valuation methods such as EQ-5D (EuroQol-5 Dimensions), SF-6D (Short-Form Six-Dimensions), HUI (Health Utilities Index), and QWB (Quality of Well-Being) are recommended. 
Equity issues statedYes 
Discounting costsBase case: one year interest rate; sensitivity analysis: 0-8% 
Discounting outcomesBase case: one year interest rate; sensitivity analysis: 0-8% 
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and rangeAll assumptions should be subject to sensitivity analysis. 
Sensitivity analysis-methodsOne-way, multi-way, threshold analysis, analysis of extremes, scenario analysis, Monte Carlo simulation 
Presenting resultsReports both in disaggregated and aggregated form. 
Incremental analysisYes 
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio)Yes 
Portability of results (Generalizability)Yes, PE study should address the extent to which both the input data and the results can be applied from one setting to another, both domestically and internationally if cross-country data is involved 
Financial impact analysisYes, budget impact analysis is recommended when data is available 
Mandatory or recommended or voluntaryVoluntary for now to start, expecting to be recommended in a few years 

Acknowledgement: ISPOR Beijing Chapter and ISPOR Northeast China Regional Chapter highly contributed to the Guidelines development and the key feature form. Should you have any comments and suggestions, please email

Country Selection Page | PE Guidelines Index Page