These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6565461)

  • 21. The clinical nurse specialist: evaluation issues.
    Morath JM
    Nurs Manage; 1988 Mar; 19(3):72-5, 78, 80. PubMed ID: 3347408
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Nurses in academic hospitals are evaluated. Introduction of functional appraisal for nurses].
    van Nieuwaal C
    Tijdschr Ziekenverpl; 1985 Oct; 38(22):676-8. PubMed ID: 3853384
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Faculty evaluation: our shackle or parachute?
    Sullivan MJ
    Nurs Health Care; 1985 Oct; 6(8):446-8. PubMed ID: 3851196
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Being objective about appraisal.
    McKenzie I
    Nurs Times; 1985 Dec 18-31; 81(51):25-6. PubMed ID: 3853781
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Evaluation of the work of nurses by reckoning with the results of socialist competition].
    Khorov GV; Alekseev AV; Borovitskaia LV
    Med Sestra; 1988 Jun; 47(6):11-4. PubMed ID: 3412159
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Evaluation of nursing personnel in the hospitals of the Emilia Romagna region].
    Simonini L
    Prof Inferm; 1984; 37(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 6425839
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. How evaluations can improve performance.
    DeSimone A
    RN; 1984 Jul; 47(7):15, 17. PubMed ID: 6564689
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Peer review.
    Micheli AJ; Modest S
    Nurs Clin North Am; 1995 Jun; 30(2):197-210. PubMed ID: 7777403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Evaluation of nursing instructors. Chosing significant criteria].
    St-Julien D
    Nurs Que; 1990; 10(1):38-9. PubMed ID: 2300317
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [The head nurse and the difficulties of personnel evaluation].
    Lanctôt L
    Infirm Can; 1979 Jun; 21(6):18-20. PubMed ID: 255446
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quantifying quality.
    Pullan B; Chittock J
    Nurs Times; 1986 Jan 1-7; 82(1):38-9. PubMed ID: 3633094
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. "Is that ward report finished yet"?
    McDonald E
    N Z Nurs J; 1985 Feb; 78(2):3-4. PubMed ID: 3856777
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Peer review in performance appraisal.
    Mann LM; Barton CF; Presti MT; Hirsch JE
    Nurs Adm Q; 1990; 14(4):9-14. PubMed ID: 2385384
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Developing criteria for promotion and tenure.
    Garrity M; Miller V; Osborn M; Vanderlinden M
    Nurs Outlook; 1980 Mar; 28(3):187-91. PubMed ID: 6899063
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Performance evaluations that help nurses grow.
    McConnell CR
    RN; 1989 Feb; 52(2):15-6. PubMed ID: 2913627
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Anecdotal records improve evaluations.
    Marker CG
    Nurs Manage; 1986 Dec; 17(12):44-6. PubMed ID: 3641161
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Criteria-based performance appraisals.
    Lerch EM
    Nurs Manage; 1982 Jul; 13(7):28-30. PubMed ID: 6920625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Personnel evaluation can solve many conflict situations].
    Vibjerg M; Rosenkvist S
    Sygeplejersken; 1980 Dec; 80(50):14-5. PubMed ID: 6908229
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical ladders: back to the drawing board.
    Durio P; Muzychenko M; Williams R
    Nurs Manage; 1986 Jul; 17(7):53-4. PubMed ID: 3636739
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Professional evaluation and self-evaluation].
    Adamowicz M
    Pieleg Polozna; 1980; (11):11. PubMed ID: 6908069
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.