The mixture of Agrimonia pilosa Ledeb. and Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge. extract produces analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects in a collagen-induced arthritis mouse model.

Pain and inflammation typically manifest in patients with arthritis. It is now widely known that Agrimonia pilosa Ledeb (AP) and Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge (SM) exert anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive effects. We have previously reported that the mixture extract (ME) from AP and SM produces antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects in gout arthritis and monoiodoacetate (MIA)-induced arthritis models. In the present study, we assessed the antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects on the collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) model. The antinociceptive effects in mice were measured using the von Frey test. ME administered once or for one week (once per day) once, and one-week reduced the pain in a dose-dependent manner (from 50 to 100 mg/kg) in the CIA-induced osteoarthritis (OA) model. ME treatment also reduced tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in plasma and ankle tissues. Furthermore, COX-1, COX-2, NF-κB, TNF-α, and IL-6 expressions were attenuated after ME treatment. In most experiments, the antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects induced by ME treatment were almost equal to or slightly better than those induced by Perna canaliculus (PC) treatment, which was used as a positive control. Our results suggest that ME possesses antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects, indicating its potential as a therapeutic agent for arthritis treatment.

Comparison of Rewatching Class Recordings versus Retrieval Practice as Post-Lecture Learning Strategies.

Objective. To assess the relative effectiveness of two study strategies, rewatching a recorded lecture and retrieval practice, on Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) students' long-term retention of lecture material presented in a pharmacotherapeutics class. Methods. One hundred two first-year pharmacy students were recruited for the study. All students attended two in-class lectures on different topics. The following week, students either re-studied from the recorded lecture on one of the two topics or, on the other topic, retrieved information about class content by responding to the course objectives. Half of the students were quizzed immediately after studying both topics. One week later, all students were required to complete an unannounced quiz to measure long-term retention. Finally, students were surveyed regarding their perceptions of the two learning strategies. Time on task was recorded to assess the efficiency of each learning strategy. Results. The primary outcome was student performance on the unannounced quiz administered one week after restudy of the lecture. No difference in performance was found between students who restudied the recorded lecture versus students who retrieved information about the lecture. However, immediately after restudying the material, students who studied from the recorded lecture performed better than students who retrieved information on the lecture. In terms of efficiency, the retrieval learning method required less time for the same gain in students' long-term retention of knowledge. Conclusions. Testing may be more efficient (ie, cost-effective) for long-term performance. Students who attend class may want to avoid rewatching course recordings in favor of practice testing.

Assessing metacognition in the classroom: Student help-seeking behavior.

INTRODUCTION: The study's purpose was to develop an assessment of students' metacognitive monitoring of help-seeking behavior. METHODS: This study piloted an assessment of help-seeking behavior in first-year student pharmacists to answer two questions: (1) Does help-seeking behavior depend on how familiar students are with the content? and (2) When students ask for help, does their performance and metacognition differ from when they do not seek help? As part of their year-end capstone, students answered drug information questions. The drugs within these questions were chosen based on the level of emphasis during the first-year curriculum (i.e. more familiar or less familiar). For each question, students rated their confidence level for their answer's correctness and marked whether they would ask their preceptor for help. Bias scores were calculated under conditions of familiarity based on level of emphasis (more familiar vs. less familiar) and help-seeking (asked for help and did not ask for help). RESULTS: Students performed better on more familiar material (d = 1.2), with a small difference in confidence on more familiar material (d = 0.2). When students asked for help, they scored lower (d = -2.2) and reported lower confidence (d = -3.7). Students were more likely to ask for help from their preceptors on more familiar content than less familiar (odds ratio = 1.25) and less likely to ask for help when they were overconfident (odds ratio = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, students were more overconfident for less familiar material and were less likely to ask for help.