ArticleFamily medicine2026
ARCH-SPIKES: Faculty Development to Deliver High-Stake, Complex Feedback.
Article in Family medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Celebrating Dr Victoria Gorski's Career and Continuing Her Legacy.Family medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesMedical educators often need to give high-stake, bad news, and complex feedback to learners without any formal training about how to do this. This study assessed whether a 60- to 90 minute workshop about the novel model of ARCH (ask, reinforce, correct, help) combined with SPIKES (set up, assess perception, invitation for information, give knowledge, address emotion, strategy and summary) would improve the participant-reported competence and comfort with, knowledge of, and use of ARCH-SPIKES by educators in giving high-stake, bad news, and complex feedback.
methodsThis IRB-approved, prospective survey design study evaluated participant-reported competence and comfort, knowledge, and use of ARCH-SPIKES after a 60- to 90-minute workshop where participants practiced giving high-stake, bad news, and complex feedback in small groups from 2019 to 2022. We collected data pre-workshop, immediately post-workshop, and 6 to 9 months post-post workshop.
resultsIn unmatched data analyses, participant-reported competence (from 33% to 69% and then 73%; P<0.01) and participant-reported comfort (from 16% to 54% and then 59%; P<0.01) rose from the pre- to post- and post-post surveys. Knowledge of the ARCH and SPIKES acronyms rose sharply from the pre- to the post-surveys (18% to 98% and 9% to 94%, respectively; P<0.01), and remained significantly improved from baseline (46% for both ARCH and SPIKES; P<0.05). Thirty-six percent of post-post participants used ARCH-SPIKES in the 6 months after the workshop.
conclusionsThis highly interactive workshop increased the participant-reported competence and comfort with, knowledge of, and use of ARCH-SPIKES for giving high-stake, bad news, and complex feedback.
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.