OBJECTIVES: Of the many routes of drug administration, some are more acceptable to patients than others; for example when a choice is presented, patients will usually prefer an oral over an injectable medication, all else being equal. Patient preference may be expressed in terms of health and non-health-related measures, which include: health technology-related attributes (including ergonomics, ease of use, convenience), behaviour (e.g. needle phobia and patients’ perceptions of treatment), and adverse reactions attributable to the route of administration.  Preferences may result in process-related (dis)utility, and be revealed as (non)adherence. This review aims to examine ambulatory patients’ preferences for subcutaneously administered, self-injectable medications, compared with other routes of administration for the same medicines. METHODS: Ten electronic databases were searched for publications published between 2002 and 2012 using terms pertaining to methods of administration, preferences and adherence. Eligibility for inclusion was determined through reference to specific criteria by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of the 1,146 papers screened, 70 met the inclusion criteria. Studies focused mainly on methods of administration for insulin and treatments of paediatric growth disorders and multiple sclerosis. Pen devices were significantly preferred to needle & syringes administration in 11 out of 12 studies – particularly with respect to ergonomics, convenience and portability; however, preferences between autoinjectors and pen devices were less pronounced.  Oral administration was preferred to subcutaneous administration in 6 studies (but did not reach statistical significance), as was inhaler therapy (favoured significantly in 3 out of 4 studies). CONCLUSIONS: The review identified a number of studies which revealed important differences in patient preference between methods and routes of drug delivery. Further evidence is required to support the notion that preference translates to better adherence.