OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the extent and quality of published pharmacoeconomics studies based in China. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify pharmacoeconomics studies conducted in China. The keywords included different combinations of the following: health economics, pharmacoeconomics, cost-effectiveness, and China. The inclusion criteria for the studies were as follows: 1) original research articles; 2) written in English; 3) compared a pharmaceutical to another pharmaceutical, treatment modality, or no treatment; and 4) conducted in China. The articles were reviewed by two independent reviewers using the 100- point Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) scale for pharmacoeconomic studies and a subjective 10-point scale for cost studies. Disagreements were settled by a third researcher. General and economic analysis information of the articles was collected.  RESULTS: A total of 19 studies were included. The studies were published in 11 different journals between 2006 and 2012 with an average of five authors (SD= 2.5). The mean QHES scores for the 17 pharmacoeconomic studies was 80.4 (SD=9.9) and the mean quality score for the two cost studies was 7.0 (SD=0.7). More than two-thirds of the authors resided in China (68.4%) and most of them had a medical background (89.5%). Most studies were published in journals based in foreign countries (not China) (89.5%) and used modeling as their study design (80.0%). Articles published in foreign journals had a higher quality score but the difference was not significant (80.5 ±9.7 vs 69.0 ± 8.5).  CONCLUSIONS: China-based pharmacoeconomics studies written in English are limited, but on average, are of good quality. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals should be encouraged in China because appropriate allocation of health care resources is important in a country with large unmet medical needs.