OBJECTIVES: Korea’s Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) has been in charge of formulating economic evaluation guideline and evaluating submissions for reimbursement decision. The purpose of this study is to observe current practice patterns of using decision analytic models in submissions considered by HIRA. METHODS: Thirty-four dossiers were submitted by industry from January 2007 until December 2009, and they were evaluated by two independent researchers at HIRA. The adherence to current HIRA’s recommendation was assessed. RESULTS: Out of 34 submissions, 23 applied model-based evaluations, and more than half (14) submissions were based on markov modeling. Dynamic models were not applied any of the submissions. Submissions frequently omitted the justification of the assumptions, definition of markov states or cycle length. Parameter search /selection criteria were rarely provided, and usually extrapolated in favor of the applicants. Transparency was lacking especially models with long time horizon and multiple assumptions, and submitted models were rarely validated. CONCLUSIONS: Decision analytic models are frequently applied in economic evaluation dossiers, yet the quality of provided models varied greatly. Revised HIRA’s guideline could specify the minimum standard of modeling to increase the comparability of submitted dossiers.