Skip to main content

Table 4 Types of included preference studies

From: Methods to perform systematic reviews of patient preferences: a literature survey

Review

Type of included preference studies reported by the review

BelinchĂłn, 2016

CA, DCE

Bereza, 2015

WTP

Blanchard, 2016

RS, SG, TTO, VAS

Blinman, 2010

Preference study design not specified

Bradley, 2007

Preference study design not specified

Brooker, 2013

Preference study design not specified

Currie, 2014

DCE, SG, TTO

Damm, 2014

CA, DCE, RS, SG, TTO

Eek, 2016

CA

Eiring, 2015

CA, DCE, PC, RS, SG, TTO, VAS, WTP

Emberton, 2010

DCE, RS

Gutknecht, 2016

CA, DCE, RS, SG, TTO, VAS, WTP

Hamelinck, 2014

Preference study design not specified

Joy, 2013

CA, CV, RS, SG, TTO, WTP

Lytvyn, 2016

SG

MacLean, 2012

PTOT, RS, SG, TTO, VAS

Mansfield, 2016

CA, DCE

Phillips, 2006

CA, CV

Purnell, 2014

CA, DCE, RS, SG, TTO, VAS, WTP

Sadique, 2011

SG, WTP

Schatz, 2015

BWS, DCE, SG

Schmidt, 2016

CV, DCE, RS, WTP

Showalter, 2015

DCE, TTO

Stewart, 2016

BWS, CV, DCE, SG, TTO, WTP

Umar, 2012

DCE, PTO, SG, TTO, VAS, WTP

Van Brunt, 2011

DCE, SG

Von Arx, 2014

CV, DCE

Wilke, 2016

CA, DCE, PTO, SG, TTO, VAS

Wortley, 2014

DCE

  1. BWS Best-worst scaling, CA Conjoint analysis, CV Contingent valuation, DCE Discrete choice experiment, PC Pairwise comparison, PTO Person trade-off, PTOT Probability trade-off technique, RS Ranking or rating scale, SG Standard gamble, TTO Time trade-off, VAS Visual analogue scale, WTP Willingness to pay