A multi-taxon analysis of European Red Lists reveals major threats to biodiversity.

Biodiversity loss is a major global challenge and minimizing extinction rates is the goal of several multilateral environmental agreements. Policy decisions require comprehensive, spatially explicit information on species' distributions and threats. We present an analysis of the conservation status of 14,669 European terrestrial, freshwater and marine species (ca. 10% of the continental fauna and flora), including all vertebrates and selected groups of invertebrates and plants. Our results reveal that 19% of European species are threatened with extinction, with higher extinction risks for plants (27%) and invertebrates (24%) compared to vertebrates (18%). These numbers exceed recent IPBES (Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) assumptions of extinction risk. Changes in agricultural practices and associated habitat loss, overharvesting, pollution and development are major threats to biodiversity. Maintaining and restoring sustainable land and water use practices is crucial to minimize future biodiversity declines.

How phantom databases could contribute to conservation assessments.

Reliable data are needed to produce representative and useful conservation assessments for species. To this end, taxonomists and their unpublished, archived and unused databases-here called phantom databases-have great relevance for assessing the conservation status of species. Taxonomist's phantom databases are usually the result of a review work, and, if made available, they could be used to assess a species conservation status with greater accuracy, allowing for more effective conservation planning. Here we characterise these databases, provide examples of their relevance and recommend solutions to make these phantom databases available for conservation use. Databases of taxonomic and geographic information need not be phantom and could be made openly accessible to encourage their use in conservation activities.

Assessing the Awareness of Psychosocial Initiatives Available to Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Radiation Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study is to determine if patients are aware of psychosocial initiatives available to them throughout their cancer journey and how they would prefer to learn about these initiatives. It has been proven that patients who participate in psychosocial programs throughout their treatment benefit emotionally by showing improved moods, less cancer-related anxiety and depression, increased knowledge of their illness, and better quality of life than those who do not. Studies have shown that lack of patient awareness is a potential barrier for patients not accessing psychosocial services and supports available to them. METHODS: The data were collected using incidental sampling of breast cancer patients 18 years or older during their radiation treatments. This study assessed patients for how aware they are, how they learn, and how they would prefer to learn about different psychosocial initiatives available to them. RESULTS: Overall, 76% of participants were very unaware of individual initiatives; 69% of participants said they heard of an initiative from at least 1 resource listed. Most learned about initiatives from a poster, pamphlet, or friend/family. Learning about initiatives from the health care team, information booklets, and pamphlets was preferred. Participants who learned about initiatives with posters tended to be the least aware of initiatives compared with those who learned about the initiatives from a pamphlet or family/friend. The largest barrier for not accessing an initiative is lack of awareness. Sixty five percent of participants want assistance in deciding what initiatives to access. Promotion of initiatives at cancers centres where patients begin their cancer journey and a centralized area to go were wanted by participants. DISCUSSION: Patients who participated in the study were not very aware of initiatives offered to them and were learning about these initiatives mostly from posters, which was demonstrated as the least informational method. Trends showed that promotion through the method of pamphlets, a binder, or from a health care provider is most wanted and effective communication pathway. Results also indicated the want for a centralized area of promotion. CONCLUSION: This study suggests the need for improvement in patient awareness and access to initiatives. Future research should consider similar methodologies to improve on current communication pathways for more effective patient use. Strengthened communication pathways can create a surplus of knowledge allowing patients to make informed decisions of participation in initiatives. More informed decisions on their own care has the potential to improve overall quality of life.