Dyspepsia is common within the general population and it imposes a significant burden on health-care resources. Calculation of the economic implications of functional dyspepsia is constrained by the fact that it is only possible to make this diagnosis in a minority of individuals with the disorder, because many do not seek medical attention and investigation is not appropriate for all who do. Studies which attempt to assess the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of therapy may be further constrained by the fact that there is now good evidence that many patients with dyspepsia seek medical attention not so much because of the severity of symptoms, but because they fear that the symptoms signal the presence of some serious underlying disease. In this situation, effective well-founded reassurance that no serious disease is present is an important outcome of medical intervention and one which should be included in an economic appraisal of dyspepsia management. For obvious reasons, it is sensible to compare the cost-effectiveness of various clinical management strategies applicable in dyspepsia. Decision-tree analyses are currently fashionable but suffer from the major defect that there is no theoretical basis from which patient satisfaction with treatment options can be assessed. It is suggested that for disorders such as functional dyspepsia, which are non-lethal and non-progressive, recommendations about acceptable clinical management strategies require that account be taken of patient satisfaction with the strategies being reviewed. Cost-effectiveness calculations which take no account of this aspect of outcome are of limited relevance to clinical practice.