Use of consistent and representative data is required to obtain reliable LCA studies. To do so, the LCA review is a key part. Yet, at the international level, few guidelines are provided to conduct a critical review. Only, few aspects are mentioned e.g. in ISO 14040 standard. In this paper, findings from an international survey are presented. The survey's objectives were to get feedbacks from LCA experts on important aspects they checked during their previous reviews with a focus in the European construction sector practices. Results show that most reviewers always check usual aspects of the LCA framework while more specific aspects requiring more background are not. This study can be viewed as a contribution for both general critical review guidelines and improvements of existing review checklist for EPD in the construction sector. INTRODUCTION The results of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are highly relying on the quality of both data and the methodology used. To date, different data can be used e.g. for the LCA of building products and building as a whole. These data can come from generic LCA databases or from industry e.g. based on Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) schemes. In order to improve the reliability of LCA studies e.g. applied to the construction sector, users of building LCA tools need to obtain reliable data and results. To do so, data and results have to be clearly documented and consistently reviewed. Yet, at the international level, few guidelines are provided to conduct a critical review. Only, few aspects are mentioned e.g. in ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006; Klöpfer, 2012). This paper presents the findings on an international survey conducted in 2011 and 2012 to get feedbacks from experienced LCA experts and reviewers on the important aspects they checked during their previous reviews.