OBJECTIVES: As malaria is one of the significant public health problems in mainland Southeast Asia, several economic evaluation studies have been conducted to aid decision making particularly in malaria control programs. However, in spite of the increased number of economic evaluation studies, there have been no studies evaluating their quality. The purpose of this study is to systematically obtain and review all economic evaluation studies in malaria field and to assess their quality. METHODS: Economic evaluation studies systematic searched through HealthStar/Ovid HealthStar (1975-2003), PREMEDLINE and MEDLINE (1966-2002), PUBMED, All EBM Reviews, Current Contents/All Editions (1993-2003), CINAHAL (1982-2003), IPA (1970-2003), Thai Thesis Online (1966-2003) and Thai Index Medicus (1918-2002). Full economic evaluation studies in mainland Southeast Asia were included. All studies were evaluated using a standardized abstraction form, which was developed based on Drummond’s 10-items checklist. RESULTS: A total of 548 studies were identified from the search, only 16 published and 6 unpublished studies met inclusion criteria. After complete assessment of published and unpublished studies, only 17 studies were included. More than half of studies conducted in Thailand (53%, 9/17). Most of the studies was cost-effectiveness analysis (82%), whereas 35% (6/17) was about diagnosis. The common weaknesses included the use of non-incremental analyses (86%, 12/14), lack of question clearly stated (59%, 10/17). Provider perspective was used most frequently (35%, 6/17). Seven studies (41%) properly identified, measured, and valued all relevant costs and consequences of the intervention studies. Three studies (17%) were undertaken differential timing adjustment, and 10 studies (59%) were properly performed sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Overall, the quality of economic evaluation in the field of malaria in mainland Southeast Asia is still substandard, no studies meet all criteria of Drummond’s 10-items checklist. The standard of economic evaluation studies in mainland Southeast Asia deserves urgent improvement.