Division of Medical Humanities
Programs    
Division Faculty
Medical Ethics Course
Humanities Electives
Housestaff Web Course
Medical Humanities Library
Healthcare Ethics Workshop
Bruce Lee and Brandon Lee Scholarship
Ethics Consultation Service
Research Ethics Consultation Service
Contact Info
Medical Humanities Home
UAMS Home

 

The BRUCE LEE and BRANDON LEE

Medical Scholarship Competition

 


 

 

An endowment in memory of the actors Bruce and Brandon Lee has been established to fund a scholarship for a senior medical student according to the following guidelines:

The award (currently $3,000) may be given each year to a third-year medical student selected to concentrate a portion of his or her academic studies during the fourth year to conduct a study of ethical and human values issues concerning their clinical experience. Up to 4 credit hours can be earned for the study project. A written report of the project will be submitted before graduation.

To learn more about the scholarship or to discuss potential projects, feel free to contact Dr. Chris Hackler by phone or email (chackler@uams.edu) well in advance of the deadline.

To apply for the scholarship submit one copy of the application form (link below) by April 15. You may send by campus mail to Slot 646 or electronically to MedicalHumanities@uams.edu. Recipients of the award will be chosen by a review committee selected by the Division of Medical Humanities.

Printer Friendly Application

Sample Awards

Title

Bio-banking Disparities - Can Education Help

Abstract

 

 

Bio-banking is an expanding and critical resource to cancer research and treatment advances. This proposal specifically addresses the bio-banking disparity in African Americans (AA), who have the highest cancer rate yet donate their tissue less and have less trust than other patient populations.  This study will assess AA patient understanding of bio-banking and whether educating them about it influences their decision. Understanding the nature and risk should ensure patient trust and help maintain this vast resource. 

   

Title

Is Enforced Contraception Ethically Usable in the Acutely Mentally Ill?

Abstract

 

 

Due either to their disease or their medications, some acutely incapacitated mental patients experience a heightened sexuality. They are hospitalized with others in the same condition. Research and experience demonstrate that sexual encounters happen in such settings. The female patient is at risk for two physical consequences of unmodified sexual intercourse--pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease. Modern contraceptive techniques have all but removed the possibility of pregnancy if used properly. Since such incapacitated patients are already being restrained and treated against their will for the protection of themselves or others, is it ethical to also protect them from a pregnancy for which they are not prepared?

 

 

Title

Supporting Breast Cancer Survivors -- What Is Enough?

Abstract

 

 

Medical advances have allowed physicians to repair breast cancer patients’ physical deformities in the wake of the disease. However, countless studies have concluded that there are voids in treatment which must be equally attended - namely the psychosocial, the emotional, and the spiritual. Support groups have grown in numbers and in their quality of service over the years, but is the breast cancer patient aware of all the services available? Are physicians aware of what is available for their patients? Are family members and spouses encouraged to seek support as well? Do rural patients have access to similar outreach programs as urban patients? This pilot study was designed to explore some of these issues in order to better understand the needs of future breast cancer patients.

 

 

Title

Family Presence During Attempted Resuscitation

Abstract

 

 

It has been debated recently whether or not relatives should be allowed present during the attempted resuscitation of their loved one. Medical professionals from eighty-one hospitals in Arkansas were surveyed. Two hundred and twenty-three surveys were returned. Eighty-five respondents said they would consider allowing family member present during CPR. One hundred and thirty-one respondents said they would not consider allowing family presence. The most common reason given for not allowing family member presence was that the family was unprepared or that the CPR scene was too traumatic for family presence. However, other studies have shown that with some preparation and support some family members are helped in their grieving process by being allowed presence. Medical paternalism is not a valid reason for the routine exclusion of families from the resuscitation room.

   

Title

A Structured Discussion Of Ethical Issues Between Junior Clerks And Advanced Surgical Residents

Abstract

 

 

A forum was created to provide an opportunity for junior medical students on their surgery rotation to discuss ethical issues with senior surgical residents. A validated survey was distributed to the students after the first month of the rotation that assessed emotional stress experienced by them during the month. Structured discussions between the students and senior residents were conducted by the Lee Scholar with assistance from a physician-ethicist from the Division of Medical Humanities. Discussion focused on the results of the survey and on a number of ethical issues typically faced by junior clerks. A control group received the survey but no intervention.

Discussion sessions were lively, rich, and deep. Communication between clerks and residents was a recurring theme of the discussions. An assessment survey was conducted after all the sessions had been held. Subjective ratings of the experience were positive. Results of the survey indicated reduction of stress among the participating students together with an increase in stress among the controls, though the results for this small sample size were not statistically significant.

   

Title

Genetic Sequencing and Gene Mapping

Abstract

 

 

Genetic sequencing and gene mapping have greatly contributed to our understanding of hereditary cancers, which constitute 5-10% of all malignancies. Since the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003, many cancer related genes have been identified. While these findings have revolutionized the field of oncology, their utility in predicting cancer susceptibility in asymptomatic individuals, directing prophylactic treatments, and guiding family planning decisions is not fully understood. This investigation aims to identify cancer-susceptible patients followed at the Arkansas Cancer Research Center who have been evaluated by a physician and received appropriate counseling for cancer genetic testing within the last 24 months.  From this patient population, a subset of patients will be surveyed to determine factors influencing their individual testing decisions. 

 

 

 

 

 

Grantee Responsibilities and Expectations

Grantee Responsibilities and Expectations:

 1.      The grantee is expected to begin preliminary work on his/her project by June 1 of the M3 year.  Preliminary work includes

a.       identifying a project mentor in the Division of Medical Humanities.

                                                              i.      The grantee will check-in or meet with his/her mentor regularly throughout the M4 year.

b.      identifying persons with requisite expertise to help the grantee complete the proposed project.

c.       a review of the extant literature related to the grantee’s project.

                                                              i.      An annotated bibliography should be sent to the grantee’s mentor before October of the M4 year.

d.      if the project includes empirical research, the grantee (with the help of his/her mentor) must

                                                              i.      identify or develop the empirical methods/tools to be used.

                                                            ii.      determine what regulatory processes must be completed (e.g., IRB approval).

2.      During the Fall of the M4 year, the grantee is expected to

a.       if the project has an empirical research component,

                                                              i.      complete any regulatory processes.

                                                            ii.      begin data collection.

b.      if the project does not have an empirical component,

                                                              i.      continue to research and read relevant literature.

                                                            ii.      develop an outline for the written project.

3.      Starting in January of the M4 year, the grantee must

a.       meet monthly (or more) with his/her mentor.

b.      if the project has an empirical research component,

                                                              i.      complete data collection.

                                                            ii.      begin analysis of data.

c.       if the project does not have an empirical component,

                                                              i.      begin writing early drafts of the written project.

4.      In March of the M4 year, the grantee must

a.       if the project has an empirical research component,

                                                              i.      write an empirical research paper of his/her findings.

1.      Paper must include background, methods, results, and discussion.

b.      if the project does not have an empirical component,

                                                              i.      complete a final version of the written project.

c.       THE PROJECT IS DUE TO BE COMPLETE AND SIGNED OFF BY THE GRANTEE’S MENTOR NO LATER THAN APRIL 30th OF THE M4 YEAR 

Failure to complete the project as proposed to the Scholarship Committee will result in one of three actions, to be determined by the grantee’s mentor in consultation with the scholarship committee:

 No loss of credit and full awarding of the monetary scholarship OR

2.      Loss some portion of the academic credit to be reported to the Dean’s office OR

3.      Loss some portion of the academic credit to be reported to the Dean’s office and loss of the monetary award OR

4.      Loss of all the academic credit to be reported to the Dean’s office and loss of the monetary award