ObjectivesTo compare and analyze the differences between local and the national indicator systems, so as to provide reference for the improvement of health city indicator system in various regions and the implementation of national health city evaluation.MethodsWe performed electronic searches of the CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, website of WHO, website of Commission of Health &Family Planning prior to March, 2018. We included documents of Chinese healthy city indicator system. Literature selection and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently, and the included indicator systems were systematic reviewed.ResultsA total of 26 documents were included, involving 14 dimensions and 1 531 indicators. Health (population/level) dimension was used by 24 healthy city indicators systems and included 82 indicators. Health services dimension had been used by 22 healthy city indicators systems and including 113 indicators. Health environments dimension was used by 22 healthy city indicators systems and included 121 indicators. Health society was used by 19 systems and included 113 indicators. Health culture dimension had been used by 4 systems and included 17 indicators. The specific indicators in the two dimensions of health environment and health population were relatively consistent with the national indicator system, while the dimensions of health society, health service and health culture were highly different.ConclusionsHealth (population/level), health services, healthy environment, and healthy society are most used in each healthy city indicator system. Compared with the national indicator system, the dimension structure is highly consistent, while the formulation of specific indicators and the ownership of dimensions are quite different. Each city should improve its existing indicator system based on its own urban development status and problems.