Taren Sanders

Dr. Taren Sanders


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2018 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JSJeffrey D Stanaway
Jeffrey D Stanaway
AAAshkan Afshin
Ashkan Afshin
EGEmmanuela Gakidou
Emmanuela Gakidou
SLStephen S Lim
Stephen S Lim
DADegu Abate
Degu Abate
CMChristopher J L Murray
Christopher J L Murray
The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 comparative risk assessment (CRA) is a comprehensive approach to risk factor quantification that offers a useful tool for synthesising evidence on risks and risk-outcome associations. With each annual GBD study, we update the GBD CRA to incorporate improved methods, new risks and risk-outcome pairs, and new data on risk exposure levels and risk-outcome associations. We used the CRA framework developed for previous iterations of GBD to estimate levels and trends in exposure, attributable deaths, and attributable disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), by age group, sex, year, and location for 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or groups of risks from 1990 to 2017. This study included 476 risk-outcome pairs that met the GBD study criteria for convincing or probable evidence of causation. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from 46 749 randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL), we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We explored the relationship between development and risk exposure by modelling the relationship between the Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and risk-weighted exposure prevalence and estimated expected levels of exposure and risk-attributable burden by SDI. Finally, we explored temporal changes in risk-attributable DALYs by decomposing those changes into six main component drivers of change as follows: (1) population growth; (2) changes in population age structures; (3) changes in exposure to environmental and occupational risks; (4) changes in exposure to behavioural risks; (5) changes in exposure to metabolic risks; and (6) changes due to all other factors, approximated as the risk-deleted death and DALY rates, where the risk-deleted rate is the rate that would be observed had we reduced the exposure levels to the TMREL for all risk factors included in GBD 2017. In 2017, 34·1 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 33·3-35·0) deaths and 1·21 billion (1·14-1·28) DALYs were attributable to GBD risk factors. Globally, 61·0% (59·6-62·4) of deaths and 48·3% (46·3-50·2) of DALYs were attributed to the GBD 2017 risk factors. When ranked by risk-attributable DALYs, high systolic blood pressure (SBP) was the leading risk factor, accounting for 10·4 million (9·39-11·5) deaths and 218 million (198-237) DALYs, followed by smoking (7·10 million [6·83-7·37] deaths and 182 million [173-193] DALYs), high fasting plasma glucose (6·53 million [5·23-8·23] deaths and 171 million [144-201] DALYs), high body-mass index (BMI; 4·72 million [2·99-6·70] deaths and 148 million [98·6-202] DALYs), and short gestation for birthweight (1·43 million [1·36-1·51] deaths and 139 million [131-147] DALYs). In total, risk-attributable DALYs declined by 4·9% (3·3-6·5) between 2007 and 2017. In the absence of demographic changes (ie, population growth and ageing), changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs would have led to a 23·5% decline in DALYs during that period. Conversely, in the absence of changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs, demographic changes would have led to an 18·6% increase in DALYs during that period. The ratios of observed risk exposure levels to exposure levels expected based on SDI (O/E ratios) increased globally for unsafe drinking water and household air pollution between 1990 and 2017. This result suggests that development is occurring more rapidly than are changes in the underlying risk structure in a population. Conversely, nearly universal declines in O/E ratios for smoking and alcohol use indicate that, for a given SDI, exposure to these risks is declining. In 2017, the leading Level 4 risk factor for age-standardised DALY rates was high SBP in four super-regions: central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia; north Africa and Middle East; south Asia; and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania. The leading risk factor in the high-income super-region was smoking, in Latin America and Caribbean was high BMI, and in sub-Saharan Africa was unsafe sex. O/E ratios for unsafe sex in sub-Saharan Africa were notably high, and those for alcohol use in north Africa and the Middle East were notably low. By quantifying levels and trends in exposures to risk factors and the resulting disease burden, this assessment offers insight into where past policy and programme efforts might have been successful and highlights current priorities for public health action. Decreases in behavioural, environmental, and occupational risks have largely offset the effects of population growth and ageing, in relation to trends in absolute burden. Conversely, the combination of increasing metabolic risks and population ageing will probably continue to drive the increasing trends in non-communicable diseases at the global level, which presents both a public health challenge and opportunity. We see considerable spatiotemporal heterogeneity in levels of risk exposure and risk-attributable burden. Although levels of development underlie some of this heterogeneity, O/E ratios show risks for which countries are overperforming or underperforming relative to their level of development. As such, these ratios provide a benchmarking tool to help to focus local decision making. Our findings reinforce the importance of both risk exposure monitoring and epidemiological research to assess causal connections between risks and health outcomes, and they highlight the usefulness of the GBD...

14 February 2024 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MNMichael Noetel
Michael Noetel
TSTaren Sanders
Taren Sanders
DGDaniel Gallardo-Gómez
Daniel Gallardo-Gómez
PTPaul Taylor
Paul Taylor
BPBorja del Pozo-Cruz
Borja del Pozo-Cruz
CLChris Lonsdale
Chris Lonsdale
Objective To identify the optimal dose and modality of exercise for treating major depressive disorder, compared with psychotherapy, antidepressants, and control conditions. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods Screening, data extraction, coding, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. Bayesian arm based, multilevel network meta-analyses were performed for the primary analyses. Quality of the evidence for each arm was graded using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) online tool. Data sources Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO databases. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Any randomised trial with exercise arms for participants meeting clinical cut-offs for major depression. Results 218 unique studies with a total of 495 arms and 14 170 participants were included. Compared with active controls (eg, usual care, placebo tablet), moderate reductions in depression were found for walking or jogging (n=1210, κ=51, Hedges’ g −0.62, 95% credible interval −0.80 to −0.45), yoga (n=1047, κ=33, g −0.55, −0.73 to −0.36), strength training (n=643, κ=22, g −0.49, −0.69 to −0.29), mixed aerobic exercises (n=1286, κ=51, g −0.43, −0.61 to −0.24), and tai chi or qigong (n=343, κ=12, g −0.42, −0.65 to −0.21). The effects of exercise were proportional to the intensity prescribed. Strength training and yoga appeared to be the most acceptable modalities. Results appeared robust to publication bias, but only one study met the Cochrane criteria for low risk of bias. As a result, confidence in accordance with CINeMA was low for walking or jogging and very low for other treatments. Conclusions Exercise is an effective treatment for depression, with walking or jogging, yoga, and strength training more effective than other exercises, particularly when intense. Yoga and strength training were well tolerated compared with other treatments. Exercise appeared equally effective for people with and without comorbidities and with different baseline levels of depression. To mitigate expectancy effects, future studies could aim to blind participants and staff. These forms of exercise could be considered alongside psychotherapy and antidepressants as core treatments for depression. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018118040.

14 December 2022 in American Journal of Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KWKatrina Wilhite
Katrina Wilhite
BBBridget Booker
Bridget Booker
BHBo-Huei Huang
Bo-Huei Huang
DADevan Antczak
Devan Antczak
LCLucy Corbett
Lucy Corbett
TSTaren Sanders
Taren Sanders
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate combinations of physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep duration (defined as “movement behaviors”) and their associations with physical, psychological, and educational outcomes in children and adolescents. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychInfo, SPORTDiscus, PubMed, EMBASE, and ERIC were searched in June 2020. Included studies needed to 1) quantitatively analyze the association of 2 or more movement behaviors with an outcome, 2) analyze a population between 5 and 17 years of age, and 3) include at least an English We included 141 studies. Most studies included the combination of physical activity and sedentary behavior in their analyses. Sleep was studied less frequently. In combination, a high level of physical activity and a low level of sedentary behavior were associated with the best physical health, psychological health, and education-related outcomes. Sleep was often included in the combination that was associated with the most favorable outcomes. Sedentary behavior had a stronger influence in adolescents than in children and tended to be associated more negatively with outcomes when it was defined as screen time than when defined as overall time spent being sedentary. More initiatives and guidelines combining all 3 movement behaviors will provide benefit with regard to adiposity, cardiometabolic risk factors, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular physical fitness, well-being, health-related quality of life, mental health, academic performance, and cognitive/executive function.

29 November 2019 in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TSTaren Sanders
Taren Sanders
PPPhilip D. Parker
Philip D. Parker
BPBorja del Pozo-Cruz
Borja del Pozo-Cruz
MNMichael Noetel
Michael Noetel
CLChris Lonsdale
Chris Lonsdale
Background: Excessive engagement with digital screens is harmful to children’s health. However, new evidence suggests that exposure at moderate levels may not be harmful and may even provide benefit. Therefore, our objective was to determine if there are curvilinear relationships between different types of screen time and a diverse set of outcomes, including health and education. Methods: We address our objective using a repeated measures design. Children (N = 4013), initially aged 10–11 were assessed every 2 years between 2010 and 2014. Children’s screen time behavior was measured using time-use diaries, and categorized into five types: social, passive, interactive, educational, or other. We used measures of children’s physical health, health-related quality of life, socio-emotional outcomes, and school achievement. The analysis plan was pre-registered. Models were adjusted for gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity, number of siblings, and housing factors. Results: There were linear associations between total screen time and all outcomes, such that more screen time was associated with worse outcomes. However, there was variability when examined by screen time type. Passive screen time (e.g., TV) was associated with worse outcomes, educational screen time (e.g., computer for homework) was associated with positive educational outcomes and had no negative relations with other outcomes. Interactive screen time (e.g., video games) had positive associations with educational outcomes but negative associations with other outcomes. In all instances, these significant associations were small or very small, with standardised effects < 0.07. We found little evidence of curvilinear relationships. Conclusions: The small effects of screen time on children’s outcomes appear to be moderated by the type of screen time. Policy makers, educators, and parents should consider the type of screen time when considering the benefits and harms of use.

13 November 2023 in Nature Human Behaviour
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TSTaren Sanders
Taren Sanders
MNMichael Noetel
Michael Noetel
PPPhilip Parker
Philip Parker
BCBorja Del Pozo Cruz
Borja Del Pozo Cruz
Stuart BiddleStuart Biddle
Stuart Biddle
CLChris Lonsdale
Chris Lonsdale

17 June 2020 in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SVStewart Anthony Vella
Stewart Anthony Vella
CSChristian Swann
Christian Swann
MBMarijka Batterham
Marijka Batterham
Katherine BoydellKatherine Boydell
Katherine Boydell
SESimon Eckermann
Simon Eckermann
FDFrank P. Deane
Frank P. Deane
Purpose: In this study, we tested the effectiveness of a multicomponent sports-based program aimed at promoting early intervention, help seeking, and resilience among a sample of adolescent male sport participants. Methods: The Ahead of the Game program comprised four intervention components and a messaging campaign. Two components targeted mental health literacy, intentions to seek and provide help, and resilience among adolescent boys. A mental health literacy program for parents and a coach education program to assist in the support of athletes’ psychological needs were also included. We evaluated the program using a nonrandomized controlled trial matching two regional communities. In total, 350 sport participants (mean, 14.53 yr) were included in an intervention group, whereas 466 (mean, 14.66 yr) received usual practice in a matched control community. One hundred and eighty parents or caregivers and eight coaches also participated in the intervention components. Between-group mean differences on the primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed models, adjusted for clustering at club level, participant age, and socioeconomic status. Results: Significant positive group–time interactions were found for the primary outcomes of depression and anxiety literacy, intentions to seek help from formal sources, confidence to seek mental health information, and resilience. We also found a significant positive group–time interaction for the secondary outcome of well-being. There were no group–time interactions for social distance (stigma), intentions to seek help from informal sources, implicit beliefs about adversity, perceived familial support, or psychological distress. Conclusions: Given the high rates of sport participation worldwide and the increasing focus on mental health in this domain, translation and dissemination of the program may be warranted after replication.