The present study provides scientific support for the anti-stress and nootropic activities of aliskiren, valsartan and their combination.

Introduction:The renin-angiotensin system is distributed centrally as well as peripherally, which works in association with SNS and HPA in stress. Angiotensin is considered one of the principal hormones for bringing out stress-related changes. To find the influence of enalapril on the neuromediator of CNS and periphery, the present work was carried out. The assessment of the transmitter levels was done by estimating major urinary stress metabolites like vanillylmandelic acid, 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid, 6-β-hydroxycortisol and homovanillic acid in normal and stress-induced conditions and also in the absence and presence of enalapril treatment in rats. Materials and methods: Groups of rats were subjected to a forced swim stress one hour after daily treatment of enalapril. The 24 h urinary excretion of vanillylmandelic acid, 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid, 6-β-hydroxycortisol and homovanillic acid was determined in all groups under normal and stressed-induced conditions. Results: Daily administration of enalapril at doses of 3, 10 and 30 mg/kg/body weight inhibited the stress-induced urinary biochemical changes. However, treatment with enalapril in normal conditions increased the excretion of all selected metabolites. Conclusion: It can be speculated that enalapril prevented stress-induced increases of adrenergic, serotonergic and cortical mechanisms.

Introduction: Problem-based learning (PBL) helps in contextual and experiential learning. PBL using online platforms (PBL-op) was introduced to counter the declining interest in the mandatory e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of PBL-op on learning outcome; student perception of PBL-op; effect of communication and motivation on learning outcome; and performance in PBL-op. Material and Methods: Study participants were introduced PBL-op and the control group to PBL in classroom setting. Five-way assessment was done: learning outcome by pre-and postintervention tests; performance by project reports and presentations; communication skills; motivation; and student satisfaction through an anonymous survey. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, paired or independent t-tests to compare paired variables, Spearman's correlation to establish association, and theme-based analysis for qualitative inputs. Results: Students showed better learning outcome with PBL op than with e learning (t = 11.199; P < 0.001*), traditional teaching (t = 12.193; P < 0.001*) and PBL in classroom setting (t = −15.493; P < 0.001*; d = 1.83). Women outperformed men with PBL-op (t = −2.74; P = 0.0034*; d = 0.48). Performance in PBL was better when conducted using online platforms than in classroom setting (t = 8.5471; P < 0.001*; d = 1.01). However, learning outcome and performance in PBL-op did not show a significant association with motivation or communication skills. Students favored PBL-op as it offered them an opportunity for active participation. Discussion and Conclusion: PBL-op offers all the advantages of PBL and allows productive teamwork using familiar online platforms and freedom from restrictive class timings. It is, therefore, suggested that PBL-op may be used as a feasible and effective alternative to PBL even after the pandemic.