ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2026
Improving turnaround times with artificial intelligence in microbiology.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This dual-center study evaluated the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on urine culture turnaround times in Canadian diagnostic laboratories using microbiology laboratory automation. Data were collected before and after the implementation of PhenoMATRIX (PM), an AI-based software that provides continuous culture sorting and result interpretation support. In both a low-volume tertiary care hospital and a high-volume community laboratory, PM enabled earlier availability of interpretable results; however, reductions in time to result reporting (TTRR) were contingent on workflows for result release. At the tertiary care site, implementation of PM alone was associated with increased TTRR, reflecting delays between result availability and reporting. Integration of PM+ enabled automated release of negative results as they became available, resulting in a TTRR reduction of approximately 1.3 h. At the community laboratory, where PM+ was not implemented, a TTRR improvement of approximately 5.3 h was achieved by advancing manual screening workflows (08:00 vs 16:00), facilitating earlier review and release of PM-generated results. These findings indicate that AI-driven culture assessment reduces TTRR when coupled with processes that enable timely result release, either through automated reporting or optimized laboratory review workflows.IMPORTANCEAdvances in artificial intelligence (AI), coupled with the power of laboratory automation, is the next step in the evolution of the clinical microbiology laboratory. We demonstrated that bacterial culture assessment (urine cultures) by AI decreases the time required to release results to clinicians and reduces the hands-on time required by technologists to analyze and finalize laboratory analysis. This study was performed in two different laboratories that differed not only in geography but also in scope and scale. The same ultimate benefits were seen in both institutions demonstrating that this technology is widely applicable for most laboratories.
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.