ArticleAcademic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry2026
Processes, Challenges, and Impacts of an Accountability, Respect, Community & Humanity Task Force: A Qualitative Evaluation.
Article in Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveQualitative, process-oriented evaluations are needed to evaluate equity and antiracism efforts in academic psychiatry. The purpose of the manuscript is to present results from an evaluation of an academic psychiatry department's Accountability, Respect, Community & Humanity (ARCH) Task Force, a coalition-based equity-focused task force formed in 2020.
methodsA qualitative evaluation was conducted in 2024. Fourteen ARCH members were interviewed. Interviews were recorded and explored perceptions of ARCH's group processes, individual contributions, and perceived impacts. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.
resultsFirst, participants described ARCH's general climate and highlighted intentional efforts to foster vulnerability and connection that enabled difficult conversations. This climate varied by group size and leadership presence. Second, members identified tensions with the group's functioning, noting ambiguity in decision-making structures and frustration when input did not consistently translate into visible action. Third, participants described ARCH participation as personally and professionally meaningful but also experienced pressure to produce tangible change and frustration because of the absence of recognition or protected time. Although members perceived symbolic and cultural shifts within the department, many questioned the lasting impact of ARCH.
conclusionsThis study offers critical insights into the functioning and impact of an equity-focused committee within an academic medical setting. The tension between individual-level benefits and members' desire for broader systemic impact highlights the complexity of evaluating antiracist efforts in academic medicine. Findings contribute to the broader understanding of mobilizing for systemic equity in academic medicine and inform the design of future antiracist efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42823575What 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.