Search

Background: Postpartum Depression (PPD) is a debilitating disorder characterised as serious depressive episodes prevalent following childbirth. PPD is one of the most common complications associated with childbirth, and if untreated, can persist for up to three years into the postpartum period. Women with PPD experience barriers to accessing health care including stigma, shame, financial and time constraints, and practical considerations like lack of child-minding and transport. In Australia, postpartum women experience the lowest physical activity levels of all vulnerable populations and barriers to exercise coincide with the barriers to care for PPD including time and financial constraints, and family commitments. Therefore, women with PPD are unlikely to be reaping the physical and mental health related benefits to participating in regular physical activity. Telehealth has been proposed as a potential method for delivery of exercise interventions in vulnerable populations. The aim of this thesis was to determine the preliminary feasibility of an evidence-based physical activity and exercise promotion intervention delivered via telehealth for women with postpartum depression. Methods: This thesis includes two studies, [1] a quantitative systematic literature review and, [2] a preliminary feasibility study. The quantitative systematic literature review examined and synthesised the methods, intervention characteristics and outcome measures of telehealth physical activity and exercise interventions for postpartum women. The feasibility study was informed by results from [1]. Women indicated for postpartum depression (EPDS score of >9) at screening were recruited to a single arm, pre-post exercise intervention. Participants received 6-weeks of exercise prescription and up to three weekly, live online video consultations with a university level exercise practitioner (Accredited Exercise Scientist). The acceptability (participant satisfaction), implementation (degree of, Thesis (Masters), Master of Medical Research (MMedRes), School of Pharmacy & Med Sci, Griffith Health, Full Text

Since the 1950s, industrial fisheries have expanded globally, as fishing vessels are required to travel further afield for fishing opportunities. Technological advancements and fishery subsidies have granted ever-increasing access to populations of sharks, tunas, billfishes, and other predators. Wilderness refuges, defined here as areas beyond the detectable range of human influence, are therefore increasingly rare. In order to achieve marine resources sustainability, large no-take marine protected areas (MPAs) with pelagic components are being implemented. However, such conservation efforts require knowledge of the critical habitats for predators, both across shallow reefs and the deeper ocean. Here, we fill this gap in knowledge across the Indo-Pacific by using 1,041 midwater baited videos to survey sharks and other pelagic predators such as rainbow runner (Elagatis bipinnulata), mahi-mahi (Coryphaena hippurus), and black marlin (Istiompax indica). We modeled three key predator community attributes: vertebrate species richness, mean maximum body size, and shark abundance as a function of geomorphology, environmental conditions, and human pressures. All attributes were primarily driven by geomorphology (35%−62% variance explained) and environmental conditions (14%−49%). While human pressures had no influence on species richness, both body size and shark abundance responded strongly to distance to human markets (12%−20%). Refuges were identified at more than 1,250 km from human markets for body size and for shark abundance. These refuges were identified as remote and shallow seabed features, such as seamounts, submerged banks, and reefs. Worryingly, hotpots of large individuals and of shark abundance are presently under-represented within no-take MPAs that aim to effectively protect marine predators, such as the British Indian Ocean Territory. Population recovery of predators is unlikely to occur without strategic placement and effective enforcement of large no-take

There are two textual errors in the published paper. In the Abstract, the last line reads “hotpots” instead of “hotspots.” The same textual error is present in the Introduction. The last line of the Abstract should read as follows: Worryingly, hotspots of large individuals and of shark abundance are presently under-represented within no-take MPAs that aim to effectively protect marine predators, such as the British Indian Ocean Territory. Population recovery of predators is unlikely to occur without strategic placement and effective enforcement of large no-take MPAs in both coastal and remote locations. The first line of the last paragraph of the Introduction should read as follows: Here, we utilize an extensive data set of standardized and nondestructive baited video surveys from nine regions across the Indo-Pacific region to model predator diversity and abundance and to identify hotspots of vertebrate species richness, mean maximum body size weighted by abundance (hereafter “body size”), and shark abundance as a function of environmental conditions, geomorphology, human pressure, and management levels. The funding statement also ommits funding received from the Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity. The amended Financial Disclosure should read as follows: This work was supported by the Australian Government’s National Environmental Research Program (NERP) Marine Biodiversity Hub (TBL, PB, JC, JJM) and by the Bertar-elli Foundation (TBL, JJM). Additional support was provided by Darwin Initiative grant (Project #19027, HK), Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity (CESAB, TBL, DM, LV, JBJ, JJM), Total Foundation (PELAGIC Project, TBL, DM, LV, JBJ, JJM), French Oceanic Fleet and New Caledonian Government Pristine reef and Apex grants (DM, LV), and National Geographic’s Pristine Seas programme (AF, ES).’

There are two textual errors in the published paper. In the Abstract, the last line reads “hotpots” instead of “hotspots.” The same textual error is present in the Introduction. The last line of the Abstract should read as follows: Worryingly, hotspots of large individuals and of shark abundance are presently under-represented within no-take MPAs that aim to effectively protect marine predators, such as the British Indian Ocean Territory. Population recovery of predators is unlikely to occur without strategic placement and effective enforcement of large no-take MPAs in both coastal and remote locations. The first line of the last paragraph of the Introduction should read as follows: Here, we utilize an extensive data set of standardized and nondestructive baited video surveys from nine regions across the Indo-Pacific region to model predator diversity and abundance and to identify hotspots of vertebrate species richness, mean maximum body size weighted by abundance (hereafter “body size”), and shark abundance as a function of environmental conditions, geomorphology, human pressure, and management levels. The funding statement also ommits funding received from the Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity. The amended Financial Disclosure should read as follows: This work was supported by the Australian Government’s National Environmental Research Program (NERP) Marine Biodiversity Hub (TBL, PB, JC, JJM) and by the Bertar-elli Foundation (TBL, JJM). Additional support was provided by Darwin Initiative grant (Project #19027, HK), Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity (CESAB, TBL, DM, LV, JBJ, JJM), Total Foundation (PELAGIC Project, TBL, DM, LV, JBJ, JJM), French Oceanic Fleet and New Caledonian Government Pristine reef and Apex grants (DM, LV), and National Geographic’s Pristine Seas programme (AF, ES).’