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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9275787)

  • 1. Employee performance reviews: a necessary "evil"?
    Cericola SA
    Plast Surg Nurs; 1997; 17(2):86-7. PubMed ID: 9275787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Performance management. Part 2: performance review and appraisal.
    Amann M
    AAOHN J; 1996 Aug; 44(8):421-2. PubMed ID: 8852241
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Does your appraisal system measure up?
    Wilson P; Bodden JS
    Nurs Manag (Harrow); 1999 Apr; 6(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 10382522
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Performance management. How to manage--Part. 6.
    Martin V
    Nurs Times; 2000 May 25-31; 96(21):41. PubMed ID: 11962953
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Six pointers for addressing employee performance concerns.
    Higgins L
    Nurs Manage; 1999 Mar; 30(3):56. PubMed ID: 10188536
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance evaluation: building blocks for credentialing and career advancement.
    Queen VA
    Nurs Manage; 1995 Sep; 26(9):52-5; quiz 56-7. PubMed ID: 7659365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The value of fair grading.
    Humphreys J
    Nurs Manag (Harrow); 1996 Jun; 3(3):12-3. PubMed ID: 8716227
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Productivity in home healthcare: part I: assessing nurse effectiveness and efficiency.
    Benefield LE
    Home Healthc Nurse; 1996 Sep; 14(9):698-706. PubMed ID: 8991890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Individual performance review.
    Lilley R
    Nurs Manag (Harrow); 1997 Jun; 4(3):20-1. PubMed ID: 9313574
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Performance appraisal: a motivational tool.
    Lukes EN
    AAOHN J; 1993 Dec; 41(12):599-600. PubMed ID: 8110303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Feedback and efficiency: a staff development model.
    Chu LK; Chu GS
    Nurs Manage; 1991 Feb; 22(2):28-31. PubMed ID: 1990332
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Taking the fear out of peer review.
    Parks J; Lindstrom CW
    Nurs Manage; 1995 Mar; 26(3):48N, 48P. PubMed ID: 7746577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Factors affecting the use of nursing diagnosis.
    Thomas NM; Newsome GG
    Nurs Outlook; 1992; 40(4):182-6. PubMed ID: 1495870
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Productivity in home healthcare: Part II: Maintaining and improving nurse performance.
    Benefield LE
    Home Healthc Nurse; 1996 Oct; 14(10):803-12. PubMed ID: 9052065
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Give-and-take feedback.
    Grensing-Pophal L
    Nurs Manage; 2000 Feb; 31(2):27-8. PubMed ID: 10827690
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A better approach to performance reviews.
    Thomas DO
    RN; 2005 Apr; 68(4):44-6. PubMed ID: 15839081
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Evaluation of co-workers. 2. Sources of error must be recognized and avoided].
    Gremmel-Thomas E; Petrachi F
    Pflege Z; 1998 Apr; 51(4):297-9. PubMed ID: 9633442
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. It's good to talk.
    Adams Z
    Nurs Times; 1999 Jan 27-Feb 4; 95(4):66-7. PubMed ID: 10085966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The importance of managing performance processes well.
    Duncan D
    Nurs N Z; 2007 Nov; 13(10):25. PubMed ID: 18084971
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. How to deal with poor performers.
    Barzey S
    Nurs Times; 2005 Sep 6-12; 101(36):40-1. PubMed ID: 16163936
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.