The academy takes part in the debate on the Colombian health system with research and reflection articles that can have an effect only if they are based on evidence. What is the academic evaluation of the health system and to what extent is based on the evidence? This article presents a systematic review of the literature, identifies the research methods used by the authors of 103 items found in Scielo, and assesses the level of evidence of published work. The literature recognizes the merit of the system consisting of the extension of coverage, and questions three aspects of the system: the weakness of public health and prevention, the rules that emphasize profitability, and the unfulfilled promise of the perfect competition as a mechanism to control costs and improve service and quality. The evidence is weak: there are no articles on the first (strongest) level of evidence, and the majority is concentrated on the sixth (weakest) level. The article concludes that the critique of the system and the reform proposals are based on weak evidence, which explains its rather marginal role in the political debate.