OBJECTIVES: To survey how much systematic review or meta-analysis (SR/MA) related items were addressed in national pharmacoeconomics guidelines. METHODS:  We searched pharmacoeconomics guidelines by way of a repository of them from 33 countries (https://www.ispor.org/peguidelines/index.asp), public literature databases, and a paper dealing with a comparison of eight national guidelines for network meta-analysis (Value Health ). Excluding method reviews, indirect comparison specific guidelines, unreadable documents, 16 general pharmacoeconomics guidelines were selected as a study population. They include Portugal (1998), Hungary (2002), France (2004), Austria (2006), Canada (2006), Taiwan(2006), Belgium (2008), Poland (2009), Ireland (2010), United States (2012), Norway (2012), United Kingdom (2013), Australia (2013), Germany (2013), South Africa (2013), Scotland (2014). We developed 26 checklists of SR/MA including 14 basic and 12 technical ones. RESULTS: Guidelines have been published from 1998 to 2014. All came from Western countries except Taiwan. SR/MA term and RCT/observational studies term were most commonly used in 13 of 16 (81%). Literature search was addressed in 10 of 16 (63%). Indirect comparison was addressed in 9 of 16 (56%). Guidelines of top 3 acceptance rate came from Germany (17/26=65%), United Kingdom (15/26=58%), and Scotland (13/26=50%) which were relatively recent ones. French and Portuguese guidelines did not accept any item related to SR/MA. Median acceptance rate was 5.5/26 (21%). CONCLUSIONS: Although national pharmacoeconomics guidelines have been published in many countries, only 21% of the SR/MA related items were addressed. Yet, it seems to be increasing in recent guidelines.