No abstract

Background While severe obesity in childhood poses the greatest long-term health risks, access to treatment is a common barrier. The present pilot study examined the effect of a 7-week low-dose physical activity (PA) intervention on PA and body mass index (BMI) in severe obese adolescents delivered via telephone and mail. Methods Adolescents (n = 64) receiving care from a pediatric obesity medical clinic were randomized to a control (n = 30) or intervention (n = 34) group. Height and weight were measured and BMI z-scores were calculated. PA was assessed by a pedometer. All measurements were completed pre- and post-intervention. The intervention group received weekly newsletters and telephone calls discussing various PA topics based on motivational interviewing for 7 weeks. The control group received no contact. A series of 2 × 2 (group by time) repeated measures analysis of covariances (ANCOVAs) adjusting for length of time between visits were performed to examine the effect of the intervention on PA and BMI z-scores. Results The majority of adolescents were severely obese (77%, BMI: > 99th percentile). Intention-to-treat analysis revealed intervention effects were not observed for either pedometer steps or BMI z-score (p > 0.05). Among those with complete data, adolescents who successfully changed their BMI z-score had larger BMI z-score changes than those who did not change their BMI z-score (p = 0.0001). This improvement was due to something other than PA as the change in BMI z-score was similar among those who did and did not successfully increase PA levels (p > 0.05). Conclusions More intensive, comprehensive, and longer-term treatment is needed in this high risk population.

The identification of factors that predict trends in population abundance is critical to formulate successful conservation strategies. Here, we explore population trends of Canadian vertebrates assessed as “at-risk” by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada and the threats affecting these trends using data from the Canadian Living Planet Index. We investigate how threat profiles—the combination of threats for a given species—vary among species and taxonomic groups. We then investigate threat profile as a predictor of temporal trends—both exclusively and in combination with additional biotic and abiotic factors. Species had 5.06 (±2.77) threats listed on average, and biological resource use (BRU) was the most frequently cited. Our analysis also revealed an association between taxonomic group and population trends, as measured by the proportion of annual increases (years with a positive interannual change). By contrast, the predictive power of threat profile was poor. This analysis yielded some useful insight for conservation action, particularly the prioritization of abating BRU. However, the predictive models were not as meaningful as originally anticipated. We provide recommendations on methodological improvements to advance the understanding of factors that predict trends in population abundance for prioritizing conservation action.

As we enter the next phase of international policy commitments to halt biodiversity loss (e.g. Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework), biodiversity indicators will play an important role forming the robust basis upon which targeted, and time sensitive conservation actions are developed. Population trend indicators are perhaps the most powerful tool in biodiversity monitoring due to their responsiveness to changes over short timescales and their ability to aggregate species trends from global down to at a sub-national or even local scale. We consider how the project behind the foremost population level indicator - the Living Planet Index - has evolved over the last 25 years, its value to the field of biodiversity monitoring, and how its components have portrayed a compelling account of the changing status of global biodiversity through its application at policy, research and practice levels. We explore ways the project can develop to enhance our understanding of the state of biodiversity and share lessons learned to inform indicator development and mobilise action.

No abstract