OBJECTIVES: Even though patient preference (PP) studies are associated with high costs, time investment, and burden on patients, the findings are generally not used beyond the purpose of the original study. If PP study findings could be transferred to other contexts, resources could be better utilized. We conducted a scoping review to assess the readiness of the current PP study landscape for evidence synthesis and transferability research.

METHODS: Quantitative PP studies examining risks and benefits of treatments were identified through a systematic search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Primary outcomes for data extraction were the used elicitation methods, reported outcome measures, patients’ countries of residence, studied indications, and examined attributes. Criteria for successful benefit transfers from environmental economics were used to assess the readiness of the PP study landscape for transferability research.

RESULTS: In total, 634 PP studies were included in the review. Of these, 460 were discrete choice experiments (DCEs), with 399 consistently reporting on part-worth utilities. In terms of geographical trends, most PP studies were conducted in the USA (N=225), multi-country setups (N=82), Germany (N=55), the UK (N=52), and The Netherlands (N=46). Indication-wise, most research was concentrated in type 2 diabetes (43 DCEs, 7 non-DCEs), psoriasis (22 DCEs, 8 non-DCEs), and multiple sclerosis (20 DCEs, 7 non-DCEs). Similarities in studied attribute sets were generally low across indications, but moderately high in type 2 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of PP studies is dispersed across various indications and therapeutic focus areas, which generally limits comparability of study findings. However, numerous DCEs on type 2 diabetes showcased a high consistency in reported outcome measures, and a moderately high degree of overlap in studied attributes. Combined with the availability of methods to compare findings despite differences in studied attributes, we foresee a positive outlook for exploring evidence synthesis and transferability research further.