Table S2.

PREFS checklist for assessing quality of preference assessment reporting in the manuscripts included in the review

Question	Answer
	No/not clear	Yes
Purpose: Is the purpose of the study in relation to preferences clearly stated?	The purpose/research question/objectives/aim does not mention preference, but may mention satisfaction, quality of life, ratings, acceptance	Any reference in the research question/objectives/aim to preference, utility/disutility, willingness to pay, importance, priorities, goals, revealed preference (eg, choice to continue)
Respondents: Are the responders similar to the nonresponders?	Evidence of significant differences OR No assessment of the difference between responders and nonresponders OR Responders are compared only to a target population rather than nonresponders	Any evidence that the responders do not differ significantly from the nonresponders
Explanation: Are methods of assessing preferences clearly explained?	The question(s) or response options are not clear	The actual preference question is reported in the text or an appendix, or if it is referenced and available elsewhere, and if it is clear what response options were available to respondents, even if the mode of the question (eg, written, oral, online) is not clear OR For studies with multiple questions relating to preferences such as conjoint/discrete choice studies, it is clear what was presented to respondents and what responses were available
Findings: Were all respondents included in the reported findings and analysis of preference results?	Some responses are excluded from the analysis and the possibility of this introducing systematic bias has not been ruled out OR It is not clear whether all respondents were included in the analysis	All respondents who completed the preference question were included in the analysis OR For studies with multiple questions relating to preferences such as conjoint/discrete choice studies, all respondents who at least partially completed the preference questions were included in the analysis OR If some respondents who at least partially completed the preference questions were excluded from the analysis (eg, non-traders, lexicographic preferences, failed test question, irrational preferences, did not complete) AND there is any evidence that those excluded do not differ significantly from those included
Significance: Were significance tests used to assess the preference results?	The study reports only proportions, counts, graphs, etc	The study reports P-values, P-value ranges (eg, P<0.05), confidence intervals, means with standard deviations or standard errors in relation to the preference results (eg, testing the preference hypotheses or study objectives)

Notes: Table reproduced from Springer and PharmacoEconomics, 31, 2013, 877–892, Joy SM, Little E, Maruthur NM, et al. Patient preferences for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a scoping review, Table 1, Copyright © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013, with kind permission from Springer Science and Business Media.¹