Table 3. Proctor et al.’s implementation outcome framework [21] and CFIR [22] applied to outcomes of included studies.

Domain	Description	Measure	No. of intervention studies/Total (%)
Implementation outcomes and factors
Proctor et al. [21]. (hereafter ‘Proctor’) Implementation outcomes • the effects of deliberate and purposive actions to implement new treatments, practices, and services [21]	Acceptability The perception among implementation stakeholders that a given treatment, service, practice, or innovation is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory [21]	• Patients or healthcare professionals’ satisfaction with the mainstreaming intervention [29–31, 33, 40, 48, 51, 54]	8/25 (32%)
	Cost The cost impact of an implementation effort [21]	• implementation cost of intervention or cost savings [29, 31, 40, 48]	4/25 (16%)
CFIR Process	Reflecting & Evaluating Quantitative and qualitative feedback about the progress and quality of implementation accompanied with regular personal and team debriefing about progress and experience [22]	• Healthcare professionals’ feedback about the intervention [40, 42, 54]	3/25 (12%)
Self-efficacy	Characteristics of individuals Individual belief in their own capabilities to execute courses of action to achieve implementation goals [22]	• Healthcare professionals’ belief about their ability to undertake intervention [29, 30, 33, 40]	4/25 (16%)
Intervention Characteristics	Cost Costs of the innovation and costs associated with implementing the innovation including investment, supply, and opportunity costs [22]	• implementation cost of intervention or cost savings [29, 31, 40, 48]	4/25 (16%)
Service outcomes and implementation factors
Proctor Service Outcomes • the extent to which services are safe, effective, patient -centred, timely, efficient, and equitable [56, 57]	Effectiveness Providing services based on scientific knowledge to all who could benefit [56, 57]	• GC Referral [29, 34–39, 41, 42, 44, 46–48, 52, 53, 55] • GC completed [34–41, 44, 46–48, 51–54] • GT completed [31, 34–41, 44, 47–48, 51–55] • Patients with identified gene mutations [29, 43, 31–36, 39, 40, 41, 44, 48, 51, 52, 54, 55]	16/25 (64%)
	Timeliness Reducing waits and sometimes harmful delays for both those who receive and those who give care [56, 57]	• Time to GC or GT [32–35, 52] and results [29, 31–33, 54]	10/25 (40%)
	Equity Providing care that does not vary in quality because of personal characteristics [56, 57]	• GT access and undertaken [31, 34–41, 44, 47–48, 51–55] • GC referrals [29, 34–39, 41, 42, 44, 46–48, 52, 53, 55]	17/25 (68%) 16/25 (64%)
CFIR Process	Executing Carrying out or accomplishing the implementation according to plan [22]	• use of a quality improvement or process model [35–37, 39, 40] • use of an implementation science framework [42]	6/25 (24%)
	Engaging Attracting and involving appropriate individuals in the implementation and use of the intervention through a combined strategy of social marketing, education, role modelling, training, and other similar activities [22]	• Engaging health professionals through education or implementing the intervention [29, 30–48, 51, 52, 54, 55]	24/25 (96%)
Inner setting	Readiness for Implementation–Available resources The level of resources dedicated for implementation and on-going operations, including money, training, education, physical space, and time [22]	• use of health professional as a resource for implementation [29–48, 51, 52, 54, 55]	24/25 (96%)
	Access to Knowledge & Information Ease of access to digestible information and knowledge about the intervention and how to incorporate it into work tasks [22]	• use of education as a component of the intervention [29, 30, 32, 33, 36–40, 42, 45, 46, 51–54]	16/25 (64%)
Client outcomes and implementation factors
Proctor Client Outcomes Consumer wellbeing and clinical effectiveness [21]	Satisfaction The consumers’ satisfaction with the intervention used [21]	• Patients satisfaction with mainstreaming intervention [29–31, 48, 51, 52]	6/25 (24%)
	Symptomology Identifying hereditary cancer so that patients and health professionals can enact treatment management and cancer prevention strategies	• Identification of hereditary cancer [29, 43, 31–36, 39–41, 44, 48, 51, 52, 54, 55] • Access or referral to cancer prevention information [29, 32, 45, 55] • Treatment management impact [29, 33, 52, 55]	17/25 (68%) 4/25 (16%) 4/25 (16%)
CFIR Outer setting	Patient Needs & Resources The extent to which patient needs, as well as barriers and facilitators to meet those needs, are accurately known and prioritized by the organization [22]	• Patients satisfaction with mainstreaming intervention [29, 30, 31, 48, 51, 52]	6/25 (24%)

GC Genetic Counselling GT Genetic testing.