OBJECTIVES: ‘Real world’ data can improve understanding of the cost effectiveness of health care technologies and are likely to become increasingly important in decisions affecting patient access and in drug development. However little is known about the investment industry currently makes in these studies, or their impact on HTA.  The aim of this study was to examine industry views on the relevance and impact of ‘real world’ data on HTA and on the relative advantages and disadvantages of conducting these studies in the UK. METHODS: Survey of British pharmaceutical companies. RESULTS: Responses were received from 31 British pharmaceutical companies, covering most of the larger companies in terms of market share. Three quarters of these reported they were engaged in collecting real life data of some kind in the UK. Data collection efforts were more common for health service costs, resource use and treatment pathways; clinical outcomes; burden of disease; and patient outcomes data.  The collection of data on patients’ ability to work; patient costs; and impacts on patients’ caregivers/family was less common. The availability of local expertise on HTA was a leading factor in choosing to undertake such studies in the UK; other important factors  were the perceived importance of local data to NICE; and the influence of NICE on HTA decisions in other markets, particularly elsewhere in Europe.  The main barrier to conducting studies in the UK was cost and perceived difficulty in obtaining ethics consent and NHS approval. Views on whether ‘real world’ evidence influenced NICE decisions were somewhat equivocal.  However, participants felt that real world data were likely to be more important in providing evidence on health outcomes in chronic conditions, to track outcomes over longer time periods than is feasible in clinical trials, and for cancer and ‘orphan’ medicines. CONCLUSIONS: While industry recognises the value of 'real world' evidence, there are barriers to conducting such studies in the UK.