Abstract We propose a Bayesian hypothesis testing framework that allows for the assessment of evidence collected during a clinical trial about the cost-effectiveness of a healthcare technology. The model exploits a Bayesian updating rule that makes the link between the evidence collected in clinical research and the expected payoffs of adoption to the healthcare system. The framework takes into account the cost of decision errors in the payoff function, allowing the decision maker to compute the cost of taking a decision when evidence is far from the optimal decision triggers. We show, using a real-world cost-effectiveness study based on clinical trial evidence, how rules derived from a sequential adaptive design approach can lead to quicker decisions when compared to the value of information decision framework. Our application shows that a sequential approach has the potential to lead to quicker decisions, higher payoffs, and better health outcomes.