The impact of the COVID-19 health crisis on the mental health of the population requires the implementation of new primary screening strategies of mental health disorders to intervene in a timelier manner, and technology may provide solutions. We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of the mobile app Mentali (version 1.1.2; creators: Jorge Alfonso Solís Galván Sodel Vázquez Reyes, Margarita de la Luz Martínez Fierro, Perla Velasco Elizondo, Idalia Garza Veloz, Alejandro Mauricio González and Claudia Caldera Villalobos, Zacatecas, México) as a primary screening tool for anxiety and depression disorders in medical students and to assess the triggering risk factors. This was a descriptive and longitudinal study and included 155 Mexican medical students. Participants interacted with Mentali for 6 months. The mobile app integrated the Beck anxiety and depression inventories together with a mood module. At the end of the interaction, the students received psychological and psychiatric interventions to confirm their primary diagnoses. Symptoms of moderate/severe anxiety and depression were present in 62.6% and 54.6% of the studied population. When corroborating the diagnoses, Mentali obtained a sensitivity of 100%, 95%, and 43% to classify a mental health disorder, anxiety, and depression, respectively. The most important triggers found were as follows: belonging to a dysfunctional family, being introverted, and having suffered from bullying. The proportion of users with excellent/good mood decreased from 78.7% to 34.4% at the end of the semester, and the proportion of users who claimed to have bad/very bad mood increased from 7.4% to 34.4% at the end of the semester (p < 0.05). Mentali was useful for identifying users with anxiety and/or depression, and as an auxiliary tool to coordinate the provision of specialized interventions, allowing us to increase the proportion of patients who needed psychological care and received it by 30%. The efficacy of Mentali in identifying activities through time with an impact on the mood and mental health of the users was confirmed. Our results support the use of Mentali for the primary screening of mental health disorders in young adults, including medical students.

Background and Objectives: Sentinel surveillance in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico represented a significant cost reduction and was useful in estimating the population infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, it also implied that many patients were not screened and therefore had no accurate diagnosis. In this study, we carried out a population-based SARS-CoV-2 screening in Mexico to evaluate the COVID-19-related symptoms and their weighting in predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also discuss this data in the context of the operational definition of suspected cases of COVID-19 established by the Mexican Health Authority’s consensus. Materials and Methods: One thousand two hundred seventy-nine subjects were included. They were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR. The weighting of COVID-19 symptoms in predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated statistically. Results: Three hundred and twenty-five patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 954 were negative. Fever, asthenia, dysgeusia, and oxygen saturation predicted SARS-CoV-2 infection (odds ratios ranged from 1.74 to 4.98; p < 0.05). The percentage of asymptomatic COVID-19 patients was 36% and only 38.15% met the Mexican operational definition. Cq-values for the gene N of SARS-CoV-2 were significantly higher in asymptomatic subjects than in the groups of COVID-19 patients with neurological, respiratory, and/or musculoskeletal manifestations (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Dysgeusia, fever, and asthenia increased the odds of a positive result for COVID-19 1.74–4.98-fold among the study population. Patients with neurological, respiratory, and/or musculoskeletal manifestations had higher viral loads at COVID-19 diagnosis than those observed in asymptomatic patients. A high percentage of the participants in the study (61.85%) did not meet the operational definition for a suspected case of COVID-19 established by the Mexican Health Authority’s consensus, representing a high percentage of the population that could have remained without a COVID-19 diagnosis, so becoming a potential source of virus spread.

Background: Bullying in university settings is a significant yet understudied contributor to psychological distress. Differentiating the sources of victimization, may reveal distinct risk profiles associated with mental health and substance use outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the frequency and risk factors associated with bullying victimization among medical students, and to identify associations with mental disorders and substance use. Methods: A nested case–control cohort study was conducted with 124 medical students. Participants completed nine validated psychometric instruments evaluating neurobehavioral traits, emotional distress, substance use, and scholar bullying. Bivariate and multivariate regression models were used to estimate coefficients and odds ratios for key outcomes. Results: 42.7% of the students reported victimization, with teacher harassment (37.1%) more frequent than peer harassment (27.4%); 22.6% experienced both. Teacher harassment was primarily characterized by intentional harm (78%); peer harassment involved abuse of authority (63%). ADHD, severe stress, and substance use were associated with teacher-related victimization, while peer victimization was linked to ADHD, stress, impulsivity, and suicide risk. Childhood abuse, high stress levels, and non-heterosexual orientation as predictors of teacher harassment (p < 0.05). Notably, students with a non-heterosexual orientation were over six times more likely to report teacher harassment, highlighting the disproportionate vulnerability of sexual minorities within academic power dynamics. Conclusions: Teacher- and peer-related harassment are prevalent and often co-occur, with teacher-perpetrated bullying emerging as both more frequent and more strongly associated with mental health and identity-based vulnerabilities. Students with ADHD, high stress levels, and non-heterosexual orientation are at significantly greater risk. These findings emphasize the need for institutional accountability, inclusive academic policies, and targeted mental health support to protect vulnerable students and prevent harm within educational environments.