ISSUE:  An ISPOR Special Task Force is currently working on an initiative to identify and discuss key methodological issues in defining and applying value frameworks to health care resource allocation issues, and has convened a Special Task Force (STF) that will collaborate to produce a white paper that advises on the appropriate definition and use of high-quality value frameworks. A number of methodological issues have been identified that have created concerns about the validity of current US value frameworks for decision-making from various perspectives. However, a number of European countries have essentially been using types of value assessments for decision-making, and many of these same concerns have already been considered in those countries. How should the ISPOR STF consider European approaches and pick the most applicable from among them, and are there areas where the US should adapt and potentially improve on, European approaches, in order to address the concerns that have stimulated the creation of these frameworks? OVERVIEW:  In recent years a number of US-based organizations have put forth Value Assessment Frameworks, employing a variety of methodologies and perspectives. Most, if not all, of the issues they have been addressing have already been considered in existing European HTA guidelines, such as the Eunetha Core Model, although some US-based frameworks have adopted considerably different approaches, more oriented towards shared clinician-patient decision-making. Based on these approaches, it appears that conventional cost-utility analyses will not completely account for all the factors felt to be important in US value frameworks.