ArticleScientific reports2026
Novel convolutional neural network for bacterial identification of confocal microscopic datasets.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The evolution of next-generation lateral flow assays for bacterial and fungal diagnostics.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI), complex mathematical algorithms, is currently employed across various fields to perform tasks quickly and effectively. In this study, a novel deep-learning algorithm named (CM-Net) was developed to classify biological data obtained as images from Confocal Microscopy. The images were collected for two types of bacterial species: (Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus), where the number of images was 300 for each class. To enhance the dataset, we divided each image (using the augmentation method) into a small number of images with 224 × 224 dimensions, resulting in a total of 7066 images for both classes. These augmented images were fed to CM-Net to ensure accurate results and avoid bias in the developed algorithms. The algorithm was trained and tested 30 times with a 5-K cross-validation for each time. The algorithm's performance was evaluated using seven metrics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, NVA, F1-score, and MCC), where the respective results were 96.08%, 95.98%, 96.19%, 96.78%, 95.26%, 96.38%, and 92.11%, indicating the model's high accuracy and reliability. CM-Net drastically reduces bacterial identification time by automating large-scale data analysis, processing results in 8.9 min. The automation provided by CM-Net simplifies workflows, enabling non-expert workers to perform microbial identification without extensive training. The significant outcomes of applying CM-Net for bacterial identification revolve around its transformative impact on data analysis's speed, efficiency, and accuracy, making advanced analysis accessible to non-experts while minimizing human error.
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.