The human histamine H 2 -receptor (hH 2 R) couples to G s -proteins to activate adenylyl cyclase and to G q -proteins to activate phospholipase C, but phospholipase C activation has not consistently been observed. The aim of this study was to compare coupling of hH 2 R to insect and mammalian G s -and G q -proteins in Spodoptera frugiperda (Sf9) cells. Interaction of hH 2 R with mammalian G proteins was assessed with coexpressed proteins or receptor-G a fusion proteins that enhance coupling efficiency. hH 2 R efficiently coupled to insect G s -proteins to activate adenylyl cyclase. However, hH 2 R poorly coupled to insect G q -proteins as assessed by the lack of enhancement of histamine-stimulated steady-state GTP hydrolysis by regulators of G protein signaling (RGS proteins). In contrast, RGS-proteins efficiently enhanced GTP hydrolysis stimulated by the human platelet-activating factor receptor (PAFR) and the histamine H 1 -receptor (H 1 R) from man and guinea pig. The measurement of intracellular free Ca 2+ concentration was not useful for studying receptor/G q -protein coupling. hH 2 R also efficiently interacted with mammalian G s -proteins, specifically with fused G sa as assessed by guanosine 5¢-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTPcS)-sensitive highaffinity agonist binding, agonist-stimulated [ 35 S]GTPcS binding and adenylyl cyclase activation. In contrast, coupling of hH 2 R to coexpressed and fused mammalian G qa was poor. However, our inability to reconstitute efficient coupling of PAFR and H 1 R to mammalian G qa indicated that a large portion of the expressed G protein was functionally inactive. Taken together, our data show that hH 2 R couples more efficiently to insect cell G s -proteins than to insect cell G q -proteins. Unfortunately, there are significant limitations in the usefulness of Sf9 cells for comparing the coupling of receptors to mammalian G s -and G q -proteins and assessing G q -mediated activation of effector systems. The histamine H 2 -receptor (H 2 R) is a prototypical neurotransmitter receptor that belongs to the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) (Leurs et al. 1995; Hill coupled receptor; gpH 1 R, guinea pig histamine H 1 -receptor; gpH 2 R, guinea pig histamine H 2 -receptor; G q -proteins, family of G proteins (comprising mammalian G qa , G 11a , G 14a , G 15a and G 16a and insect G qproteins) that mediates phospholipase C activation; G s -proteins, family of G proteins (comprising mammalian G sa-short , G sa-long , G sa-extralong and G aolf and insect G s -proteins) that mediates adenylyl cyclase activation; G saL , long splice variant of the G s -protein G sa ; G saS , short splice variant of the G s -protein G sa ; GTPcS, guanosine 5¢-O-(3-thiotriphosphate); hH 1 R, human histamine H 1 -receptor; hH 2 R, human histamine H 2 -receptor; hH 2 R-G saL , fusion protein containing the human histamine H 2 -receptor and the long splice variant of G sa ; hH 2 R-G saS , fusion protein containing the human histamine H 2 -receptor and the short splice variant of G sa ; ...

Objective:The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map the existing literature on virtual simulation debriefing methods utilized in health professions education.Introduction:Virtual simulation has emerged as a feasible alternative to in-person learning, allowing learners to continue their education despite constraints of space, finances, and clinical placement opportunities. Virtual simulation has proven to be a vital resource for health care students during the COVID-19 pandemic. While virtual simulation provides students with continued opportunities to develop knowledge and critical thinking in a safe environment, debriefing is a crucial step for successful knowledge uptake and deeper learning. Several studies have examined this topic in various health care settings; however, there are currently no scoping reviews that have explored virtual simulation debriefing in health professions education.Inclusion criteria:This review will consider primary and secondary source articles that explore debriefing of virtual simulation within any undergraduate or graduate health education programs. Any setting that provides virtual simulation and debriefing, in any country, will be included.Methods:The review will be conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for scoping reviews and will search the following databases: Cochrane Library, JBI Evidence-based Practice Database, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, Nursing and Allied Health Database, and Web of Science. Studies published from 2016 onward will be considered. The data extracted will include specific details about the concept, context, studymethod, and critical findings relevant to the review objective. Data will be presented in diagrammatic or tabular format in a manner that aligns with the objective of this scoping review.Scoping review registration: :Open Science Framework https://osf.io/36s5x

No abstract