Table 3:

The models of hospital performance evaluation used by the selected articles

Reference	Evaluation model	Objectives	The results of hospital performance evaluation
(9); (15).	Accreditation standards	Study of the hospital performance evaluation based on the accreditation standards	Emphasizing the lack of any interests for evaluating organization and paying attention to the performance indicators such as Bed Occupancy Rate (BOR), average length of stay (LoS) and Bed Turnover Rate (BTR) in the annual hospital evaluation, instead of focusing only on the availability and structural indicators (9). The lack of attention to the financial dimension was considered as the most important weakness (15).
(8); (16–24).	Pabon Lasso (PL) Model	Hospital performance evaluation using three indicators, including BOR, BTR, and Average LOS	Most hospitals had low performance in terms of their BOR, BTR, or both and the researchers had suggested the development of outpatient services, the transfer of a number of beds to other hospitals, and the prevention of developing and expanding hospitals as good and proper strategies for increasing the studied hospitals’ productivity and efficiency.
(25–39)	Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)	Study of the hospitals’ technical efficiency using DEA	The results showed that the potential for improving technical efficiency in the studied hospitals was equal to three to seven percent. The hospital services followed the constant returns to scale. Furthermore, the surplus factors of production, especially nursing staff, were evident in the studied hospitals. Therefore, the researchers suggested removing surplus manpower.
(40–46)	EFQM Excellence Model	Hospital performance evaluation or self-assessment, and determining the areas which need improvement	Studied hospitals had been reported as poor to moderate based on the EFQM Model. The results showed the strengths and weaknesses in 9 areas of the model. Using this model, because of its systematic approach, attention to the organizational processes, and being result-oriented, had been recommended.
(2); (13); (47–49).	Malcolm Baldrige Model	Hospital performance evaluation or self-assessment, and determining the areas which need improvement	The performance of studied hospitals had been reported as poor to moderate based on the Baldrige Model. In all five selected studies, the evaluation had been carried out only in one hospital. Using this model provided the opportunities for comparing the performance of different hospitals inside and outside of the country.
(4); (6); (50–51).	BSC	Providing a model for hospital performance evaluation using the BSC	Several dimensions of patients, internal processes, financial dimension, employees’ learning and growth (48), and clinical dimension (4) have been identified and the related indicators have been determined.
			A model offered with six dimensions, including 1) hospital objectives, 2) hospital inputs, 3) structures and systems, 4) processes, 5) the outputs, and 6) performance outcomes (5).
(52)	Ratio Analysis	Comparing the performance of Iranian hospitals	Paying attention to these four indicators (BTR, bed turnover interval rate, average LoS and BOR), along with the mortality rate, and using the combination of different performance evaluation models have been recommended for a better description of the image of the hospital performance.