Search

Background: Histology laboratory courses comprise the study of cell structures, tissues, and body organs, which are mainly examined using a microscope. Two types of examinations assess learning outcomes in these courses in Taiwan: the traditional, light microscope station (LMS) examination and the Microsoft PowerPoint (MS PPT) examination. Whether these examinations exhibit different influences on students' grade performances remains to be examined. Aim: The aim is to compare the grade performance and opinion of students in a medical center for the LMS and MS PPT examinations. Methods: We compared the grade performances of students who completed LMS (3 cohorts) or MS PPT (2 cohorts) examinations retrospectively and conducted a survey to investigate the students' learning attitude between these two types of examinations. Results: Grade performances in the MS PPT group were not significantly higher than those in the LMS group. The average scores of students who failed the LMS examination were significantly lower than those of students who failed the MS PPT examination. Questionnaire survey results showed that the MS PPT examination was easier for students and that they may spend less time studying for it. The LMS examination positively influenced learning attitudes among students with a rather low self-demand. Conclusion: Examination type may affect learning attitude, especially among students with a rather low self-demand. The MS PPT examination seems to be easier for students and was connected to remarks about less study time in the histology laboratory course, and for students with low self-demands, the traditional LMS examination may be a better option. We believe that with the advance of digital whole histology slide imaging, there is an opportunity to revolutionize both learning and evaluating for all medical school students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Interleukin-1 α (IL-1 α ) is a potent cytokine that plays a role in inflammatory arthritis and bone loss. Decoy receptor 3 (DCR3) is an immune modulator of monocytes and macrophages. The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanism of DCR3 in IL-1 α -induced osteoclastogenesis., Methods: We treated murine macrophages with DCR3 during receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa Β ligand- (RANKL-) plus IL-1 α -induced osteoclastogenesis to monitor osteoclast formation by tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining. Osteoclast activity was assessed using a pit formation assay. The mechanisms of inhibition were studied by biochemical analyses, including RT-PCR, immunofluorescent staining, flow cytometry, an apoptosis assay, immunoblotting, and ELISA., Results: DCR3 suppresses IL-1 α -induced osteoclastogenesis in both primary murine bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMM) and RAW264.7 cells as it inhibits bone resorption. DCR3 induces RANKL-treated osteoclast precursor cells to express IL-1 α , secretory IL-1ra (sIL-1ra), intracellular IL-1ra (icIL-1ra), reactive oxygen species (ROS), and Fas ligand and to activate IL-1 α -induced interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase 4 (IRAK4). The suppression of DCR3 during RANKL- or IL-1 α -induced osteoclastogenesis may be due to the abundant secretion of IL-1ra, accumulation of ROS, and expression of Fas ligand in apoptotic osteoclast precursor cells., Conclusions: We concluded that there is an inhibitory effect of DCR3 on osteoclastogenesis via ROS accumulation and ROS-induced Fas ligand, IL-1 α , and IL-1ra expression. Our results suggested that the upregulation of DCR3 in preosteoclasts might be a therapeutic target in inflammatory IL-1 α -induced bone resorption., Competing Interests: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Yi-Jen Peng et al.)