Background: Clinical presentation and outcomes of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy remain limited and fragmented. Objectives: To summarize the existing literature on COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and childbirth, particularly concerning clinical presentation and outcomes. Search strategy: A systematic search of LitCovid, EBSCO MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases. The references of relevant studies were also searched.Selection criteria: Identified titles and abstracts were screened to select original reports and cross-checked for overlap of cases. Data collection and analysis:A descriptive summary organized by aspects of clinical presentations (symptoms, imaging, and laboratory) and outcomes (maternal and perinatal). Main results:We identified 33 studies reporting 385 pregnant women with COVID-19 infection: 368 (95.6%) mild; 14 (3.6%) severe; and 3 (0.8%) critical. Seventeen women were admitted to intensive care, including six who were mechanically ventilated and one maternal mortality. A total of 252 women gave birth, comprising 175 (69.4%) cesarean and 77 (30.6%) vaginal births. Outcomes for 256 newborns included four RT-PCR positive neonates, two stillbirths, and one neonatal death.

Background HPV tests for the screening of cervical cancer in low‐income countries (LICs) might improve early detection and preventive efforts. Objectives To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HPV tests for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) in LICs. Search strategy The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and CINAHL databases were searched on June 1, 2020. References of relevant studies were hand‐searched. Selection criteria Diagnostic test accuracy studies were included if women had an HPV test for cervical cancer screening, followed by verification with colposcopy and colposcopy‐directed biopsy. The primary target was CIN2+. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Bivariate diagnostic random‐effects meta‐analysis was used. Main results Eleven studies including 82 556 women were eligible, most of which were at low risk of bias. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio of hybrid capture test of samples collected from the cervix by healthcare providers for detecting CIN2+ and CIN3+ was 42.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.7–76.3) and 97.1 (95% CI 35.3–215.0), respectively. Conclusions Evidence indicates that hybrid capture tests can be used for screening of cervical cancer in LICs. Future studies are warranted for self‐sampling and for low‐cost HPV tests.

STUDY QUESTION What is the scope of literature regarding women’s reproductive span in terms of definitions, trends, determinants? SUMMARY ANSWER The scoping review showed a wide variation in definitions, trends, and determinants of biological, social and effective women’s reproductive span. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Women’s reproductive span refers to a woman’s childbearing years. This influences women’s reproductive decisions. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A systematic scoping review was conducted. We searched MEDLINE, Pubmed, JSTOR, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus electronic databases from inception to January 2021 without imposing language or date restrictions. We searched unpublished sources including the Global Burden of Disease, Demographic and Health Surveys, and National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. The list of relevant references was searched by hand. Sixty- seven reports on woman’s reproductive span were included in this review. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS This scoping systematic review followed a previously published framework and guidelines. The reporting of this scoping review followed the reporting guidance provided in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Extension for Scoping Reviews. Identified records were independently screened and data were extracted. We performed conceptual synthesis by grouping the studies by available concepts of reproductive span and then summarized definitions, measures used, temporal trends, determinants, and broad findings of implications on demographics and assisted reproduction. Structured tabulation and graphical synthesis were used to show patterns in the data and convey detailed information efficiently, along with narrative commentary MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The relevant 67 reports on woman’s reproductive span were published between 1980 and 2020 from 74 countries. Most reports (42/67) were cross-sectional in design. Literature on reproductive span was conceptually grouped as biological (the interval between age at menarche and age at menopause), effective (when a woman is both fertile and engaging in sexual activity), and social (period of exposure to sexual activity). We summarized the working definitions, trends, and determinants of each concept. Few articles addressed implications on demographics and assisted reproduction. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION A formal assessment of methodological quality of the included studies was not performed because the aim of this review was to provide an overview of the existing evidence base regardless of quality. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The review produced a comprehensive list of possible definitions of women’s reproductive spans. This list can be used in a subsequent Delphi exercise aiming to ask a broad spectrum of relevant stakeholders to rate the importance of each definition in relation to demography and fertility care. This data will then help inform a consensus meeting in which a selected group of editors will collaborate to outline a set of core definitions, identify implications for policy, practice or research, and define future research opportunities to explore linkages between reproductive spans and need for assisted reproduction STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work received funding from the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), a cosponsored programme executed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The authors had no competing interests. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A

Background: Human Papillomavirus (HPV) tests for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings might improve early detection and preventive efforts. Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HPV tests for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) in low resource settings.Search strategy: we will search the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus. We will search references of relevant studies. Selection criteria: We will include diagnostic test accuracy studies if women had an HPV test for cervical cancer screening, followed by verification with colposcopy and colposcopy-directed biopsy. The primary target is CIN2+. Data collection and analysis: Two authors will independently screen studies, extract data, and assess methodological quality. We will use bivariate diagnostic random-effects meta-analysis.Results: This is the protocol of a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review.Conclusions: Evidence will aid in making well-informed decisions for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings. Implications for research will be outlined for future studies.

No abstract