OBJECTIVES: The evidence needs of payers in mainland China at the national, regional and local hospital level are poorly understood. As such, analysis is required to capture payer preferences regarding evidence submissions from pharmaceutical companies and identify emerging trends in value evidence needs. METHODS: A qualitative telephone survey of 30 key payers in Tier 3A hospitals, provincial funding bodies and national decision making groups was conducted. Respondents were asked to score the impact of the following value attributes in their routine assessment of healthcare products for formulary listing and/or reimbursement: 1) Innovation; 2) Health-related quality of life; 3) Unmet need; 4) Cost effectiveness; 5) Price; 6) Budget impact; 7) Safety; 8) Efficacy in head-to-head trials; and 9) Efficacy in selected populations.  Scores derived were weighted according to a market impact assessment in order to derive maximal scores for each evidence type. RESULTS: Hospital payers reported that budget impact was the least significant evidence type (Score 5.6), due to the “self-pay” model of patient access in China. Among hospital and provincial payers, price was the second least significant attribute (Score 6.3), due to the separation of pricing functions and assessment of clinical evidence in China. However, efficacy in head-to-head studies (Score 7.5) and safety (Score 8.3) were the most desired attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of cost-effectiveness is at an early stage in major hospitals in China; the key attributes continue to be safety and efficacy. However, there is a trend towards requirement of health-related quality of life data at the national payer level, particularly regarding oncology medicines.  Further research is needed in this area, in order to gain a more detailed understanding from the pharmaceutical company perspective.