Ecosystem hea1th assessment and ana1ysis in the coastal zone of Fujian province

近年来，随着沿海经济的高速发展和海洋资源开发利用力度的不断加大，海洋环境正面临着前所未有的严重挑战。本文首次根据《近岸海洋生态健康评价指南》中的“河口及海湾生态系统生态环境健康评价方法”，利用2006年~2010年以来福建省环保厅的近岸海域监测网络多年来的监测数据及相关文献资料，对福建省近岸海域的生态系统健康状况进行分析评价。 主要研究结果如下： 水环境：与过去5年相比，2010年福建省近岸海域监测区域水环境质量有所改善。近岸海域水环境中的主要污染物为无机氮（平均浓度0.301mg/L）和活性磷酸盐（平均浓度0.021mg/L）。综合2010年三期的监测结果，福建省近岸海域水环境健康指数为...In recent years, as rapid development of coastal economy and gradual enhanced exploitation of marine resources, increased pollutant loading to the coastal waters has lead to the deterioration of ambient environmental quality. Therefore, our coastal marine ecosystem is facing unprecedented severe challenge. In the present research, for the first time, we applied ecosystem health assessment methods...学位：理学硕士院系专业：海洋与环境学院海洋学系_海洋生物学学号：X200521100

福建省近岸海域海洋生态健康评价与分析

根据《近岸海洋生态健康评价指南》中的“河口及海湾生态系统生态环境健康评价方法“,利用2006年~2010年以来福建省环保厅的近岸海域监测网络的监测数据及相关文献资料,对福建省近岸海域的海洋生态健康状况进行分析评价。评价结果显示:福建省近岸海域生态系统健康指数为60.3,处于亚健康状态,其中水环境、沉积物、生物残毒和栖息地环境处于健康状态,而生物处于不健康状态。根据当前实际情况,该文从法律保障、管理机制和补偿机制等方面提出了适合保持生态健康的具体策略,为推动福建近岸海域经济发展与海域生态健康可持续发展提供参考

Physical health care monitoring for people with serious mental illness

Background Current guidance suggests that we should monitor the physical health of people with serious mental illness and there has been a significant financial investment over recent years to provide this. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of physical health monitoring as a means of reducing morbidity, mortality and reduction in quality of life in people with serious mental illness. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (October 2009) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. Selection criteria All randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials focusing on physical health monitoring versus standard care or comparing i) self monitoring vs monitoring by health care professional; ii) simple vs complex monitoring; iii) specific vs non-specific checks iv) once only vs regular checks or v) comparison of different guidance. Data collection and analysis The authors (GT, AC, SM) independently screened search results and identified three studies as possibly fulfilling the review's criteria. On examination, however, all three were subsequently excluded. Main results We did not identify any randomised trials which assessed the effectiveness of physical health monitoring in people with serious mental illness. Authors' conclusions There is no evidence from randomised trials to support current guidance and practice. Guidance and practice are based on expert consensus, clinical experience and good intentions rather than high quality evidenc

General physical health advice for people with serious mental illness

There is currently much focus on provision of general physical health advice to people with serious mental illness and there has been increasing pressure for services to take responsibility for providing this. For the comparison of physical healthcare advice versus standard care we identified five studies (total n = 884) of limited quality. For measures of quality of life one trial found no difference (n = 54, 1 RCT, MD Lehman scale 0.00 CI -0.67 to 0.67) but another did (n = 407, 1 RCT, MD Quality of Life Medical Outcomes Scale - mental component 3.7 CI 1.7 to 5.6). There was no difference between groups for the outcome of death (n = 407, 1 RCT, RR 1.3 CI 0.3 to 6.0), for the outcome of uptake of ill-health prevention services, one study found percentages significantly greater in the advice group (n = 363, 1 RCT, MD 36.9 CI 33.1 to 40.7). Economic data were equivocal. Attrition was large (> 30%) but similar for both groups (n = 884, 5 RCTs, RR 1.18 CI 0.97 to 1.43). Comparisons of one type of physical healthcare advice with another were grossly underpowered and equivocal