OBJECTIVES: Outcomes in healthcare technology reviews now increasingly include cost as well as effectiveness. The aim of this study is to report the findings and implications of a survey regarding the usefulness of NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) structured abstracts within this process. METHODS: Postal survey of lead authors of Technology Assessment Reviews (TARs) commissioned by the UK's National Institute for Clinical Excellence. The questionnaire investigated the usefulness of NHS EED regarding: search strategy, data extraction, quality assessment, and requirement for new modeling studies. Qualitative data were requested, including opinions regarding NHS EED. RESULTS: NHS EED was used in 90% of all identified reviews (n=46). The questionnaire response rate was 57%. The percentage of scores 3 or above, 2 or below, or N/A were, respectively: search strategy= 60%, 22%, 17%; data extraction= 26%, 26%, 48%; quality assessment= 30%, 22%, 48%; requirement for new modeling studies= 22%, 26%, 52%. The results were expanded upon in the qualitative data from the respondents. CONCLUSION: Where several economic evaluations had been published NHS EED was utiliZed and valued as an independent source, and was highly useful to non-economists. However, those undertaking TARs also used confidential data from company submissions and cost data for studies not critiqued on NHS EED. More standardization and use of quality checklists in reviews of economic studies is clearly needed. The findings will help in developing and improving NHS EED in its role of providing health outcomes and economic evidence in TARs.