ArticleScientific reports2026
Deep neural networks in medical microbiology for bacterial colonies classification.
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.
- Deep neural networks in medical microbiology for bacterial colonies classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While automation has transformed many areas inside clinical laboratories, microbiology still relies heavily on manual tasks, particularly the culture of samples on agar plates and their subsequent manual review for microorganism identification and antibiotic susceptibility profiling. Bacterial colony detection and classification require trained professionals, making the process time-consuming and prone to human error. Developing deep learning models to automate these tasks could improve microbiology workflows and accelerate clinical decision-making. In this study we trained and evaluated five object detection architectures (Faster R-CNN and RetinaNet with ResNet-50 and ResNet-101 backbones, and YOLOv8) on the Annotated Germs for Automated Recognition (AGAR) dataset for bacterial colony classification. Transfer learning, cross-subset generalization, and Weighted Box Fusion (WBF) ensemble methods were applied to enhance and characterize performance. Additionally, we created and publicly released a curated dataset of 165 agar plate images containing colonies of S. aureus, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli cultured across four distinct culture media. YOLOv8m achieved a mean Average Precision (mAP) of 69.0% on the AGAR dataset, outperforming the best Detectron2 model (Faster R-CNN ResNet-101, 63.1%) by 5.9 percentage points. A four-model WBF ensemble combining both architectures reached 70.5% mAP (95% CI: 68.4-71.7). Cross-subset evaluation showed that a single model trained on the full dataset generalizes well to individual imaging conditions, making subset-specific fine-tuning largely unnecessary. On the curated dataset, a mixed ensemble reached 58.7% mAP (95% CI: 57.1-63.7). These results demonstrate that architecture choice and training data diversity are the primary drivers of performance for colony detection on agar plates.
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.