**Scoping review protocol: Interventions for Aedes-borne infectious disease prevention and control in Latin America and the Caribbean region** Vaitiare Mulderij-Jansen*1,2,3, Prachi Pundir4, Maria E. Grillet5, Izzy Gerstenbluth3,6, Ashley Duits7,8,9, Adriana Tami1, Ajay Bailey2 1 University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, Groningen, The Netherlands 2 International Development Studies, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands 3 Curaçao Biomedical & Health Research Institute, Department of Epidemiology, Willemstad, Curaçao 4 The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India 5 Instituto de Zoología y Ecología Tropical, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Venezuela 6 Epidemiology and Research Unit, Ministry of Health Environment and Nature of Curaçao, Willemstad, Curaçao 7 Red Cross Blood Bank Foundation, Willemstad, Curaҫao 8 Curaçao Biomedical & Health Research Institute, Department of Immunology, Willemstad, Curaçao 9 Institute for Medical Education, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands *Corresponding author E-mail address: v.i.c.jansen@umcg.nl **Abstract** *Introduction* Mosquito-borne infectious diseases (MBIDs) are an increasing public health concern worldwide. Preventing or reducing MBIDs depends mainly on interrupting human-mosquito contact through the control of vector populations. Many interventions have been conducted to avoid or control MBIDs epidemics in the last decades. However, countries in the Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region still struggle to prevent and control the emergence or re-emergence of MBIDs. For this reason, a scoping review will be conducted to synthesise existing evidence on Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus prevention and control interventions performed in the last twenty-one years in the LAC region. LAC countries can use the scoping review findings to build knowledge, compare mosquito control strategies, and learn how others deal with their challenges to develop more effective and sustainable mosquito control interventions. *Methods and Analysis* The scoping review is based on the methodology by Joanna Briggs Institute for conducting a scoping review. The articles will be searched in the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE and ScienceDirect database. Grey literature will be searched on governmental and non-governmental organisation websites. Three reviewers will independently screen all title/abstracts and full-text articles based on the eligibility criteria for the review. The reviewers will use the Rayyan.ai program to manage the collected publications. All bibliographic data, study characteristics and interventions will be documented and analysed to answer the research questions of the scoping review. *Ethics and Dissemination* The scoping review will synthesise evidence on performed Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions in the LAC region. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, presentations, and a one-day stakeholder meeting organised in Curaçao. Since the scoping review methodology synthesises information from publicly available publications, no ethical approval is needed.  **Introduction** Mosquito-borne infectious diseases (MBIDs)(e.g., the chikungunya virus, dengue virus, and Zika virus infections) are infections caused by pathogens transmitted by the bite of an infected mosquito (1). In the Latin American and Caribbean region (LAC), Ae. aegypti is the primary mosquito vector of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika virus (2). In addition, Ae. albopictus has also been shown to be a competent vector of the viruses mentioned above (3, 4). For many MBIDs, there are no vaccines or antiviral treatments available. For the chikungunya virus, dengue virus, and Zika virus infection, prevention and reduction of the transmission of these diseases hinge primarily on mosquito control and interruption of human-vector contact. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends using the Integrated Vector Management (IVM) program to manage the mosquito populations (5). However, many countries, including countries in the LAC region, face challenges such as insufficient resources, funding, collaboration, workforce, training, and/or issues with immigration or cross-border transmission, which obstruct the development and implementation of the IVM program (6, 7). In the last decade, many epidemics of MBIDs occurred in the LAC region. These epidemics highlighted the weakness in managing MBID spread in the LAC (7, 8). Based on the history of MBIDs, it is undeniable that other MBIDs, such as the Mayaro represent emerging threats favoured by climate change, globalisation, travel, and trade (9). The threat of the emerging or re-emerging MBIDs calls our attention to learn from our experiences and work towards more sustainable integrated prevention and control strategies by taking the current challenges of countries in the LAC region into account. For this reason, this recent scoping review aims to synthesise existing evidence on Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions performed in the last twenty-one years in the LAC region. Countries in the LAC can use this study’s findings to build knowledge, compare mosquito control strategies, and learn how others dealt with their challenges to develop more sustainable mosquito control interventions. **Study rationale and objectives** This scoping review will offer countries in the LAC region a descriptive overview of their performed Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus control interventions, the effectiveness of each intervention, and the reason for success or failure. The countries in the LAC region can use this synthesised data to evaluate and improve their practices based on the lessons learned from other countries located in the same region. Since the timeframe (2000-2021) of this scoping review covers different MBIDs epidemics, it highlights the key challenges that obstruct the implementation of effective and sustainable Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus control interventions in the LAC region. The results of this scoping review will be published in an open-access journal, so countries with limited financial resources can also access this literature to strengthen and improve their mosquito control interventions. Since this scoping review considers all types of Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus control interventions, countries in the LAC can use our findings to evaluate their IVM program holistically. **Methods and analysis** *Protocol design* This scoping review is informed by the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley, which has been further developed by Levac et al. and the Joanna Briggs Institute (10-12). According to the mentioned literature, the scoping review process needs to be organised in at least five stages. Stage 1. Identifying the research question. Stage 2. Identifying relevant studies. Stage 3. Study selection. Stage 4. Charting the data. Stage 5. Collating, summarising and reporting the results. The framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley suggests an optional stage, “stage six”, where key stakeholders can be consulted to identify additional references or studies to include and collect their feedback about the scoping review results. Although consultation with key stakeholders would represent a valuable exercise, this scoping review will not conduct such an exercise because of time constraints and the current COVID pandemic. We will partially consider the mentioned stage since the authors of this review have different expertise, including epidemiology, immunology, and entomology. In addition, they have performed research or are currently working in the LAC region. Their work experience and knowledge will be used to critically review the results of this scoping review. *Stage 1. Identifying the research question.* Before identifying the research question, an exploratory review of the literature on MBID interventions in LAC was performed. The exploratory review results helped refine the scope of the objectives and research questions for the scoping review. This phase informed the decision not to restrict the scoping review to one specific MBID intervention as it became clear that multiple interventions are needed to reduce the burden of MBIDs. To our knowledge, most publications focus on one type of MBID intervention and do not take the impact of combined interventions into account. Furthermore, there are limited published synthesised data on MBID interventions in the Caribbean region. Lastly, lessons learned are documented, but the provided recommendations do not fully consider the challenges of the countries in the LAC region. The following research questions were identified based on the initial exploratory research: i. What is the existing evidence regarding Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions performed in the LAC region in the last twenty-one years? ii. What is the difference in the evidence regarding Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions between the Caribbean and the Latin America region? iii. Which interventions were reported as effective, and mention reasons for success if reported? iv. Which interventions were reported as ineffective, and mention reasons for failure if reported? v. What are the challenges and lessons learned in applying Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions in the LAC region? vi. Which strategies were employed or recommended to deal with the reported challenges? *Stage 2. Identifying relevant studies.* The second stage of the scoping review process aims to identify the criteria to select the studies for inclusion in the review. Although a scoping review is designed to cover a broad spectrum of literature, these criteria will help filter for relevant publications. The eligibility criteria for the review is based on the ‘Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome’ (PICO) framework, and the included studies follow the following requirements: Population: The population includes residents of the Caribbean islands and countries of the Latin American region of all age groups irrespective of gender, income, occupation, or other demographic characteristics. Each article will be screened to check if the reported study population met our criteria. Articles that included hospitalised individuals with metabolic or fatal diseases/ terminal illnesses will be excluded from the review. Intervention: The primary concept of this scoping review is Ae. Aegypti and Ae. albopictus prevention and control interventions. The reviewers will include articles encompassing mosquito control interventions, including (i) insecticide-treated materials (e.g. bednets, curtains, net screens), (ii) usage of larvicides in breeding sites, (iii) usage of adulticides (e.g. outdoor fogging and indoor residual spraying), (iv) lethal oviposition trap-based mass interventions, (v) container management/reduction, (vi) health education, (vii) community engagement, (viii) media campaigns, (ix) biological control of mosquitoes (e.g. usage of other living organisms such as fish), (x) mosquito coils/repellents, (xi) house inspection, (xii) interventions focussed on behavioural change, advocacy (informed influence activities on policymakers from civil society), (xiii) integrated surveillance, epidemiological or entomological surveillance as part of a control program. Comparison: The comparison of the interventions was no intervention or the usual/ older intervention. The comparison groups or control groups could be a combination of interventions, such as biological control measure and community engagement in one group and the same interventions in two other groups individually. Such comparisons assisted in testing the effectiveness of a specific intervention. The studies that used surveillance data to assess the effectiveness of intervention and the pre-post study designs with no comparison groups will also be included in this review. Context: This scoping review will focus on countries located in the LAC region. The Latin American region consists of the following countries: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama in North and Central America. Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela in South America (13). The Caribbean region consists of the following islands: Anegada, Anguilla, Antigua, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Barbuda, Bonaire, Cayman Islands, Cuba, Curaçao, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Grenadines, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Hispaniola, Jamaica, Jost Van Dyke, Martinique, Montserrat, Nevis, Puerto Rico, Saba, Saint Croix, Saint Martin, Saint Kitts, Sint Eustatius, Saint Barthélemy, Saint John, Saint Lucia, Saint Martin, Saint Thomas, Saint Vincent, Tortola, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands, Virgin Gorda, and Water Island (13). Outcome: The reviewers will include publications that report the impact of the intervention (s) on (i) egg, larva, pupa or adult mosquito density, (ii) MBID incidence, (iii) knowledge, attitude, or practice (KAP), and (iv) environmental adaptations such as the reduction of mosquito breeding sites. The other inclusion criteria for the articles are: (i) presents an intervention within a routine context and intervention in response to an outbreak; (ii) presents a population-based intervention; (iii) published between January 2000 and May 2021; and (v) articles in English, Spanish and Portuguese. Articles will be excluded if they: (i) include only epidemiological or prevalence data without a link to mosquito control interventions; (ii) include only entomological surveillance without a link to mosquito control interventions; (iii) are not available in full-text versions; and (iv) articles in French. **Types of sources** The articles will be searched in the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE and ScienceDirect databases. Additionally, Google Scholar and Google search engine will be used to search for the first 100 relevant results using keyword search. Grey literature regarding Ae. Aegypti and Ae. albopictus control will be searched on the governmental and non-governmental organisation websites such as the WHO library database, UNICEF, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature. Forward reference search will be undertaken for references of the included articles. This scoping review will map evidence from primary studies (e.g., case reports, case series, cross-sectional studies- descriptive/analytical, case-control studies, cohort studies, randomised and non randomised controlled trials, qualitative and mixed-methods studies), narrative reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, impact evaluations, and organisational reports. Conference proceedings, editorials and commentaries will be excluded. The search strategy will be designed by two team members experienced in searching databases. Keywords will be identified based on three domains; (i) MBIDs, (ii) location, and (iii) mosquito control intervention using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), existing literature reviews, and subject experts’ opinions. The keywords will be combined with appropriate boolean operators to search for articles in electronic databases, and similar keywords will be used for grey literature. Proximity operators, truncation and wildcards will be used for keywords to increase the sensitivity of the search. The search will be initially conducted on PubMed, then tailored to other databases. PRESS checklist will be used to review the search strategy’s quality (14). *Stage 3. Study selection.* The third stage of the framework aims to identify the publications that will be included in the scoping review. The selection of publications will be performed by three reviewers independently. The reviewers will discuss any disagreement until consensus is reached, or the fourth reviewer will solve the dispute if required. The studies’ selection will be based on the PICO concept (eligibility criteria), and articles will be screened twice (i) the title and abstract screening stage and (ii) the full-text screening stage. The selection process will be presented using a PRISMA flow chart. The reviewers will use the Rayyan.ai program to manage the collected publications. Furthermore, the full text of the articles and other data files of the scoping review will be stored by the reviewers in google drive. **Stage 4. Charting the data** The extraction of results will be conducted by three reviewers using a charting table that consists of (i) bibliographic details, such as author details, (ii) year of publication, (iii) study details viz. objectives of the study, (iv) country of origin, (v) population characteristics, (vi) the methodology of the study, (vii) attributes of the intervention, and (viii) any other information relevant to the research questions. Three team members will pilot data extraction on a sample of the included studies (e.g., 10% of the complete list of retrieved studies) to ensure that the data extraction technique is consistently applied. The categories will be modified if necessary. The reviewers will discuss any issues arising when piloting, and team consultations will resolve possible disagreements. The same reviewers will be in charge of independently charting the data from each included article. The charted data will be crossed-check by one of the reviewers. The reviewers will discuss any discrepancies in extracted data until consensus is reached. **Stage 5. Collating, summarising and reporting the results.** The analysis of the extracted data will provide information on the body of research that has been conducted on interventions to control Ae. Aegypti and Ae. albopictus in the LAC region. First, the collected evidence will be presented by geographic area, and type of intervention (e.g., biological, chemical). Second, effective and ineffective interventions will be presented. The reason for each intervention’s success or failure will also be reported. Third, a summary of the lessons learned and challenges will be presented. Fourth, employed strategies or recommendations to deal with the challenges will be reported. We will discuss the research topics concerning Ae. Aegypti and Ae. albopictus control interventions that need to be priorities in the discussion section of the scoping review. As appropriate, results will be presented in an aggregate and visual form (e.g., using tables and charts). **Dissemination and ethics** Since the scoping review methodology aims at synthesising information from publicly available publications, this study does not require ethical approval. In terms of dissemination activities, an article reporting the scoping review results will be submitted for publication to an open-access scientific journal and presented at relevant conferences. We anticipate the scoping review results to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence of interventions to control Ae. Aegypti and Ae. albopictus in the LAC region. It will also provide essential information to researchers, policymakers and health professionals working in the LAC region interested in designing, improving and delivering evidence-based and effective mosquito control interventions to control MBIDs. For this reason, the results will also be disseminated as part of future workshops with stakeholders involved in MBID prevention and control in Curaçao, a small island in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. **References** 1. CDC. Mosquito-Borne Diseases [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 28 December ]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/outdoor/mosquito-borne/default.html. 2. Powell JR. Mosquito-Borne Human Viral Diseases: Why Aedes aegypti? Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2018;98(6):1563-5. 3. McKenzie BA, Wilson AE, Zohdy S. Aedes albopictus is a competent vector of Zika virus: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2019;14(5):e0216794. 4. Reiter P, Fontenille D, Paupy C. Aedes albopictus as an epidemic vector of chikungunya virus: another emerging problem? Lancet Infect Dis. 2006;6(8):463-4. 5. WHO. Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2021 28 December]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/68624/WHO_CDS_CPE_PVC_2004_10.pdf?sequence=1. 6. Dos SRC, van de Burgwal LHM, Regeer BJ. Overcoming challenges for designing and implementing the One Health approach: A systematic review of the literature. One Health. 2019;7:100085. 7. Mulderij-Jansen V, Gerstenbluth I, Duits A, Tami A, Bailey A. Evaluating and strengthening the health system of Curaao to improve its performance for future outbreaks of vector-borne diseases. Parasit Vectors. 2021;14(1):500. 8. Rodriguez-Morales AJ V-GJ-OaW. Chikungunya, a Global Threat Currently Circulating in Latin America. 2016. In: Current Topics in Chikungunya [Internet]. 9. Levi LI, Vignuzzi M. Arthritogenic Alphaviruses: A Worldwide Emerging Threat? Microorganisms. 2019;7(5). 10. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19-32. 11. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69. 12. Peters M, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Soares CB, Khalil H, D. P. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2015: Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2021 28 December ]. Available from: https://nursing.lsuhsc.edu/JBI/docs/ReviewersManuals/Scoping-.pdf. 13. Bank W. Latin America & Caribbean [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 28 December ]. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/region/latin-america-and-caribbean. 14. McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40-6.