Introduction. Self-sampling has the potential to increase cervical cancer screening (CCS) among women living with HIV (WLWH) in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, our understanding of how HPV self-collection studies have been conducted in WLWH is limited. The purpose of this scoping review was to examine the extent to which the HPV self-sampling has been applied among WLWH in LMICs. Method: We conducted multiple searches in several databases for articles published between 2000 and January 2022. With the combination of keywords relating to HPV self-sampling, LMICs, and WLWH, we retrieved over 9,000 articles. We used pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select relevant studies for this review. Once a study met the inclusion criteria, we created a table to extract each study’s characteristics and classified them under common themes. We used a qualitative descriptive approach to summarize the scoping results. Results: A total of 12 articles were included in the final review. Overall, 3,178 women were enrolled in those studies and 2,105 (66%) of them were WLWH. The self-sampling participation rate was 92.6%. The findings of our study show that 43% of the WLWH in 8 of the studies reviewed tested positive for high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) genotypes, indicating 4 out of 10 WLWH in the studies are at risk of cervical cancer. The prevalence of the hr-HPV in WLWH was 18% higher than that of HIV-negative women. Most women in the study found the self-sampling experience acceptable, easy to use, convenient, and comfortable. Self-sampling performance in detecting hr HPV genotypes is comparable to clinician-performed sampling. However, limited access (i.e., affordability, availability, transportation), limited knowledge about self-screening, doubts about the credibility of self-sampling results, and stigma remain barriers to wide acceptance and implementation of self-sampling. In conclusion, the findings of this review highlight that (a) cervical cancer is a threat to every sexually active woman but for WLWH the threat increases, (b) self-sampling laboratory performance is similar to clinician performed sampling, (c) self-sampling is associated with an increase in cervical cancer screening uptake and (d) WLWH reported a positive experience with self-sampling. However, personal, environmental, and structural barriers challenge the application of self-sampling in LMICs, and these need to be addressed. Keywords: keyword 1; keyword 2; keyword 3 (List three to ten pertinent keywords specific to the article yet reasonably common within the subject discipline.)