The article provides an overview of the different perspectives used in health economic evaluations, including patient/household, healthcare payer, healthcare provider, healthcare sector, health system, and societal perspectives. Each perspective defines the types of costs and outcomes considered in the analysis, which can significantly influence the results and recommendations of the study. The choice of perspective depends on the context, type of analysis, decision-maker, and question being addressed. The article highlights the importance of considering the perspective when interpreting health economic studies, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) where guidelines and infrastructure for economic evaluations may be less established. It discusses the implications of different perspectives on cost-effectiveness calculations, such as the scope of costs, data sources, and the inclusion of future unrelated costs. The article also addresses the ongoing debate surrounding the societal perspective, including the inclusion of indirect non-health benefits and the potential for double-counting of outcomes. Finally, it emphasizes the need for standardized definitions and guidelines to improve the consistency and comparability of health economic studies.The article provides an overview of the different perspectives used in health economic evaluations, including patient/household, healthcare payer, healthcare provider, healthcare sector, health system, and societal perspectives. Each perspective defines the types of costs and outcomes considered in the analysis, which can significantly influence the results and recommendations of the study. The choice of perspective depends on the context, type of analysis, decision-maker, and question being addressed. The article highlights the importance of considering the perspective when interpreting health economic studies, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) where guidelines and infrastructure for economic evaluations may be less established. It discusses the implications of different perspectives on cost-effectiveness calculations, such as the scope of costs, data sources, and the inclusion of future unrelated costs. The article also addresses the ongoing debate surrounding the societal perspective, including the inclusion of indirect non-health benefits and the potential for double-counting of outcomes. Finally, it emphasizes the need for standardized definitions and guidelines to improve the consistency and comparability of health economic studies.