The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Board of Directors approved the formation of an Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices Task Force to develop good research practices document(s) for indirect treatment comparisons in January 2009. Researchers, experienced in systematic reviews, network meta-analysis, synthesis of evidence, and related statistical methods, working in academia, research organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, or government, from the United States, Canada, and Europe were invited to join the Task Force Leadership Group. Several health care decision-makers who use indirect-direct-treatment-comparison evidence in health care decisions were also invited. The Task Force met, primarily by teleconference with an ongoing exchange of email, and face to-face in April 2010, to develop the topics to be addressed, agree on the outline, and draft the report. The Leadership Group determined that, to adequately address good research practices for indirect treatment comparisons and the use of these comparisons in health care decisions, the Task Force Report would comprise two articles, “Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons & Network Meta-Analysis for Health Care Decision-Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices—Part 1” and “Conducting Indirect-Treatment-Comparison and Network-Meta-Analysis Studies: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices—Part 2.” Summaries were presented for comment at the 15th Annual International Meeting in Atlanta, GA, USA, in May 2010. Drafts were sent for comment to the Task Force Review Group (103 invited and self-selected individuals interested in this topic) in July 2010. The authors considered the comments from the Task Force Review Group, and the revised drafts were sent for comment to the ISPOR membership (5550) in September 2010. Altogether, Part 1 received 23 comments, and Part 2 received 13 comments. All written comments are published at the ISPOR Web site. The authors considered all comments (many of which were substantive and constructive), made revisions, and submitted them to Value in Health.