ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2026
Comparing the impact of 360-degree evaluation and conventional methods on the performance evaluation of Iranian nurses.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPerformance evaluation stands as a vital process for health delivery organizations as a lack of regular assessments can be likened to a malady afflicting the entity. The current study compared the use of two methods of evaluation, a 360-degree and a conventional method among Iranian nurses. MATERIAL AND
methodsBased on the 360-degree performance evaluation approach, the current study involved two distinct participants, the evaluators and the evaluatees, evaluating the effectiveness of nurses using the 360-degree model, which encompasses input from Head Nurses, colleagues, and self-assessment, as well as feedback from patients and their family members. In total, 22 cardiac care units were selected by census sampling method. According to the total number of nurses in each ward, the nurses of each ward who were eligible were randomly selected. Ultimately, 137 nurses were assessed based on the two methods of performance evaluation, 360-degree and conventional methods simultaneously. All the data were analyzed using SPSS version 27.
resultsApproximately 61% (
conclusionBased on the results of the present study, the groups have different viewpoints regarding the evaluation of nurses and this evaluation method may provide useful information about nurses' performance from different aspects. Hence, healthcare policy makers can benefit this method of performance evaluation to improve the clinical performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.