ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Optimal Cut-Offs for Digital Addiction Scales as Preliminary Screening Proxies for Psychological Distress Symptoms Among Vietnamese Medical Students: A Single-Centre ROC Curve Analysis.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital technologies are central to student life, but evidence is limited on whether digital-use scales can provide useful thresholds for identifying psychological distress among medical students. This single-center cross-sectional study analyzed complete data from 600 undergraduates at a medical university in southern Vietnam. Stress, depression, and anxiety symptoms were classified using the DASS-21, while problematic smartphone use, social media use, and gaming-related problems were assessed using the SABAS, BSMAS, and a six-item GAS adaptation, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic analyses and the Youden index were used to estimate discrimination and candidate cut-offs. Non-normal DASS-21 scores were observed for stress (30.4%), depression (37.8%), and anxiety (39.0%), predominantly within the mild range. For stress, the AUCs and cut-offs were 0.75 (95% CI 0.70-0.80; ≥23.5) for SABAS, 0.67 (0.62-0.71; ≥17.5) for BSMAS, and 0.64 (0.60-0.70; ≥15.5) for GAS. For depression, the corresponding values were 0.62 (0.57-0.66; ≥21.5), 0.68 (0.63-0.73; ≥18.5), and 0.60 (0.55-0.65; ≥14.5). For anxiety, they were 0.60 (0.55-0.64; ≥20.5), 0.62 (0.57-0.67; ≥17.5) and 0.55 (0.51-0.60; ≥15.5). Sensitivity was low across thresholds (35.0-59.0%). These candidate cut-offs showed modest discrimination and should be considered only as preliminary behavioral flags prompting validated mental health assessment, not as stand-alone screening or diagnostic criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.