Table 2.

Scoping review framework and description of methods.

Arksey and O'Malley framework stage
1. Identifying the research question	• What do we already know? • What are the gaps in evidence? • What are the relevant innovations? • What are the most pressing questions we need to answer to scale-up cervical cancer elimination strategies?
2. Identifying relevant studies	• Search sources: PubMed, Scopus, reference lists, and governmental and non-profit organizational websites • Inclusion criteria:   ◦ Programmatic interventions identified by the WHO life course model (16)   ◦ English language published between 2010 and 2020   ◦ Peer-reviewed studies and conference abstracts that examined efficacy, effectiveness, sensitivity, and/or specificity of existing and emerging strategies to prevent HPV infection and detect or treat cervical precancers and cervical cancer   ◦ Interventional studies that address innovations and implementation gaps
3. Study selection	• Systematic reviews, meta-analysis and randomized controlled trials were prioritized for each intervention. When these were not available, we selected longitudinal and prospective cohort studies with relative risks or odds ratios that address HPV acquisition, progression to precancer and treatment of cancer. Individual cross-sectional studies were reviewed only if sufficient data from the above types of studies were not available.
4. Charting the data	Two authors (MS and GL) screened the search results for relevant articles and independently extracted data relevant to the key questions. The last update of the search was conducted in August 2020, and the following data was extracted using Microsoft Excel sheet (see Supplementary Material): • Primary prevention: author, year, study design, location, population, exposure, unit of exposure, comparison, comparison number of doses, outcomes, sample size, key findings • Secondary prevention: author, year, intervention, study design, location, population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, clinical endpoint, key findings
5. Collating, summarizing, and reporting the results	• As specified by Arksey and O'Malley, a narrative literature review method was used, in which data synthesis and interpretation of the findings were conducted simultaneously, in an iterative manner with the research team. In addition to the narrative synthesis, we followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Program Evaluation Framework to organize the evidence on the available and emerging strategies for cervical cancer elimination into a logic model (17).