TABLE 3.

Selected articles.

	Author, year, journal and article name, and country	Objectives	Study type, setting	Participants	Availability of the Instruments	Results	Quality appraisal (JBI)
1	Almomani et al., 2020. PLoS One, 15(6). The Difference in Knowledge and Concerns between Healthcare Professionals and Patients about Genetic‐Related Issues: A Questionnaire‐Based Study Jordan	To assess and compare the knowledge, factors affecting the knowledge and concerns of HCPs and patients regarding genetic‐related issues	A cross‐sectional study; hospital setting	1000 HCPs (76.9%): nurses (38.8%), physicians (33.9%) and pharmacists (27.3%) and 1448 patients	Full instrument available	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: stigmatization, privacy and confidentiality, consequences for employment and for obtaining health insurance Results in survey: HCPs were more concern than patients about issues related to genetic	JBI cross‐sectional 4/8
2	Calzone et al., 2012. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 44(4). Survey of Nursing Integration of Genomics into Nursing Practice USA	To assess practising nurse attitudes, practices, receptivity, confidence and competency of integrating genomics into nursing practice	A cross‐sectional study; hospital and cancer institution setting	239 licensed registered nurses	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: a potential advantages and disadvantages, reliable information	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
3	Calzone et al., 2013. Personalized Medicine, 10(7). National Nursing Workforce Survey of Nursing Attitudes, Knowledge and Practice in Genomics USA	To assess nursing attitudes, receptivity, confidence, competency, knowledge and practice in genomics to inform education efforts	A cross‐sectional study; setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	619 registered nurses	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 7/8
4	Calzone et al., 2014. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 5(1). Introducing a New Competency into Nursing Practice USA	The aim of the baseline assessment was to evaluate institutional nursing workforce attitudes, receptivity, confidence, competency, knowledge, and practices regarding genomics.	Part of a longitudinal study; hospital setting	7798 licensed registered nurses	Full instrument available in GGNPS and 2 GKAI questions described and analysed in the article, (GGNPS + GKAI + RACE)	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
5	Calzone et al., 2016. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 24(1). Test–Retest Reliability of the Genetics and Genomics in Nursing Practice Survey Instrument USA	To measure the reliability of GGNPS instrument and to revise the survey	Part of longitudinal study as cross‐sectional survey; hospital setting	232 registered nurses	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 7/8
6	Calzone et al. 2018. Nursing Outlook, 66(3). Hospital Nursing Leadership‐Led Interventions Increased Genomic Awareness and Educational Intent in Magnet Settings USA	To assess leadership team interventions to improved RNs' capacity to integrate genomics into practice	a longitudinal study with pre‐ and postinterventions; hospital setting	Registered nurses Intervention (N = 196), Controls (N = 492)	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: Visible ethics in background section: Ethical challenges of new technology increase integration of genomics into education Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI quasi‐experiment 8/9
7	Coleman et al., 2014. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 46(4). Multi‐Ethnic Minority Nurses' Knowledge and Practice of Genetics and Genomics USA	To determine minority nurses' beliefs, practices, and competency in integrating genetics‐genomics information into practice	A cross‐sectional study; setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	389 registered nurses	Full instrument was not available; a compilation of the five instruments(African American nurses, GKAI, HPBR, RACE, GGNPS)	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
8	Dagan et al., 2021. Journal of Nursing Scholarship; 53:6, Integrating Genomic Professional Skills Into Nursing Practice: Results From a Large Cohort of Israeli Nurses Israel	To explore the association of genomic knowledge, self‐epistemic authority (SEA), perceived importance of genomics in nursing, and the integration of genomic skills into nursing practice	A cross‐sectional study, hospital setting	423 nurses	Full instrument available	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: Understanding the issue of confidentiality	JBI cross‐sectional 8/8
9	Gharaibeh et al., 2010. International Nursing Review, 57(4). Nurses' and Midwives' Knowledge and Perceptions of Their Role in Genetic Teaching Jordan	To explore Jordanian nurses' and midwives' knowledge and perceptions of their role in genetic teaching.	A cross‐sectional study; hospital setting	200 registered nurses and midwives	Full instrument available	Article: Visible ethics in conclusion section: Health services must be provided and developed within a broad ethical framework Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
10	Godino et al. 2013. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(5). Knowledge of Genetics and the Role of the Nurse in Genetic Health Care: A Survey of Italian Nurses Italy	To explore nurses' basic knowledge of genetics, their perceptions of the relevance of genetics and their opinions about the role of the genetic nurse	A cross‐sectional study; setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	385 registered nurses	Full instrument available	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: No ethics Results: To open‐ended question was answered about the willingness to receive more education from ethical aspects of genetics	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
11	Lopes‐Júnior et al., 2017. Nursing & Health Sciences, 19(1). Genetic Education, Knowledge and Experiences Between Nurses and Physicians in Primary Care in Brazil: A Cross‐Sectional Study Brazil	To examine genetics education, knowledge, and genetics‐related experiences among nurses and physicians	A cross‐sectional study; primary care settings	54 respondents: 30 nurses and 24 physicians	Full instrument was not available	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Visible ethical themes: awareness of ethical aspects of genetic counselling Result: 88.9% of respondents were unfamiliar with the ethical aspects of genetic counselling	JBI cross‐sectional 5/8
12	McCabe et al., 2016. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(4). Web‐Based Assessment of Genomic Knowledge Among Practising Nurses: A Validation Study USA	To explore the feasibility of a Web‐based version of the GNCI and to test its psychometric performance	Validity evaluation hospital setting	75 registered pediatric nurses	full instrument available The Genomic Nursing Concept Inventory (GNCI)	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
13	Melo et al., 2015. Journal of Community Genetics, 6. Genetics in Primary Health Care and the National Policy on Comprehensive Care for People with Rare Diseases in Brazil: Opportunities and Challenges for Professional Education BRAZIL	To analyse genetic competencies of primary healthcare professionals in Brazil.	A cross‐sectional study; primary healthcare setting	45 health practitioners: 21 doctors, 16 nurses, and 8 dentists	Full instrument available	Article: Visible ethics in introduction section: ELSI related to genetic testing and genetic data mentioned as part of the core competencies in genetics guidelines Visible ethics in discussion section: training content of genetic counsellors includes ethics Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 4/8
14	Murakami et al., 2020. Nursing & Health Sciences. 22 (2). Developing Competencies in Genetics Nursing: Education Intervention for Perinatal and Pediatric Nurses Japan	To develop a genetics nursing seminar, to evaluate learners' awareness of genetics knowledge and confidence in providing nursing care	Prospective pilot study; university setting	15 nurses, 2 midwives and 27 students	Full instrument was not available	Article: Ethics in background section, design, and implementation of the education Instrument: No ethics in pre‐education assessment; posteducation assessment included several aspects of ethics (not included in this scoping review)	JBI cross‐sectional 7/8
15	Newcomb et al., 2019. Nursing 2019. 49(7). Are Genetics/Genomics Competencies Essential for All Clinical Nurses? USA	To describe the current utilization of genetics/genomics nursing competencies in acute care and to determine whether they perceive the competencies as relevant	A cross‐sectional study; hospital setting	533 registered nurses	Full instrument available	Article: no ethics mentioned Instrument: Visible and hidden ethics in questions in identifying ethical issues, in decision‐making process, and in clients' rights	JBI cross‐sectional 4/8
16	Plavskin et al., 2019. Nursing open, 6(4). Validity Evaluation of The Genetics and Genomics in Nursing Practice Survey USA	To psychometrically test the Genetics and Genomics Nursing Practice Survey (GGNPS) for evidence of content, face and construct validity.	Validity evaluation, a part of a longitudinal study; hospital setting	6861 registered nurses	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
17	Saligan & Rivera, 2014. The Philippine Journal of Nursing, 84(2). Filipino‐American Nurses' Knowledge, Perceptions, Beliefs and Practice of Genetics and Genomics USA	To explore the knowledge, perceptions, beliefs, practice and genomic education of Filipino‐American nurses	A cross‐sectional study; setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	112 Filipino‐American nurses	Full instrument available (compilation of five instruments)	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: A part of instrument (RACE) is entirely from ethical view: ethnicity. Hidden theme in a question: “Do you believe that genetic testing can be used to discriminate against ethnic minorities?”	JBI cross‐sectional 5/8
18	Santelli, 2016. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 2(4). Development and Psychometric Testing of the Criterion‐Referenced Measurement Tool for Genetics USA	To develop a criterion‐referenced instrument to provide effective documentation of knowledge of advanced practice nursing in genetics	Validity evaluation; setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	356 advanced practice nurses and registered nurses	Full instrument was not available, CRMTG	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 7/8
19	Seven et al., 2015. Nurse Education Today, 35(3). Nurses' Knowledge and Educational Needs Regarding Genetics Turkey	To determine Turkish registered nurses' current knowledge and educational needs in relation to genetics	A cross‐sectional study; hospital setting	175 registered nurses	Full instrument available	Article: Visible ethics in background section: nurses do not have adequate knowledge, for example ethical issues Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
20	Wallen et al., 2011. Nurse Education Today, 31. Evaluating a Hybrid Web‐Based Basic Genetics Course for Health Professionals USA	To determine learner outcomes including change in knowledge and self‐efficacy and to explore learner perceptions of the effectiveness of a basic genetics course	A prospective pre–posttest study; hospital setting	129 healthcare providers: nurses involved in clinical research (80), APN (25), nurse manager (7), allied health professionals (14)	Full instrument available	Article: Visible ethics in background section: Nurses' roles expansion since science development and ethical, legal, and social implications; education modules including ethics Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: employment discrimination, privacy Results: pre‐test showed low knowledge in ELSI of genetic testing in minors (15.7% correct) and workplace discrimination (9.4% correct)	JBI cross‐sectional 5/8
21	Whitt et al., 2016. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 28(3). Improving Nurse Practitioners' Competence with Genetics: Effectiveness of an Online Course USA	To assess the effectiveness of an online genetics course for improving nurse practitioners' knowledge, competence, and comfort with genetic principles and their application to clinical practice	A pre–posttest study, Graduate nurse practitioner students, university setting	140 students minimum of a bachelor's degree	Full instrument available	Article: Visible ethics in background subdivision: core competencies including ethics, course objectives; in limitation subdivision: instrument did not evaluate ethical issues Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 4/8
22	Williams & Dale. 2016. Journal of Nursing Education, 55(10). A Partnership Approach to Genetic and Genomic Graduate Nursing Curriculum: Report of a New Course's Impact on Student Confidence USA	To develop and assess the online course based on the Essential Genetic and Genomic Competencies for Nurses(ANA/ISONG)	A pre–poststudy; university setting	Pre‐course assessment (Graduate nursing students 10 (91%) of 11 students)	Full instrument was not available	Article: Visible ethics in background subdivision: Course content included ethics Instrument: Visible ethics in a competence category question: Confidence in ethical, legal, and social implications Results: Very low self‐reported confidence to own effective strategies to resolve ethical, legal, and social implications issues related to genetics‐genomics (1.3 + − 0.3) in 1–5 scale.	JBI cross‐sectional 4/8
23	Wright et al., 2019. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 51(1). Genomic Literacy of Registered Nurses and Midwives in Australia: A Cross‐Sectional Survey Australia	To measure the genomic literacy of Australian registered nurses and midwives	A cross‐sectional study, setting was not limited neither to hospital nor primary care	253 registered nurses (85.7%), and registered midwives (14.3%)	Full instrument available CNCI	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: No ethics	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8
24	Wright et al., 2020. Collegian, 27. Genomics in Oncology Nursing Practice in Australia Australia	To understand how genomics is understood and applied in oncology nursing practice in Australia	Qualitative Semi‐structured interviews; hospital setting	9 registered oncology nurses	Question themes available	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: No ethics	JBI qualitative 9/10
25	Yeşilçinar et al., 2022. Genetics and genomic competency of Turkish nurses: A descriptive cross‐sectional study Turkey	to assess the genetic and genomic competency of Turkish nurses in practice.	A descriptive cross‐sectional research; clinical or academic setting	385 nurses	Full instrument available, GGNPS	Article: No ethics mentioned Instrument: Hidden ethical themes: as previous GGNPS	JBI cross‐sectional 6/8