ArticlePloS one2026
Dual-input deep learning system for microbial identification from blood agar plates.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe morphological classification of microbial cultures and colonies requires specialized knowledge and experience; therefore, automation in this field remains limited. This study examines the feasibility of automating the identification of pathogenic microbial species from colony images of cultured microorganisms.
methodsTwo distinct image datasets were constructed for 10 clinically relevant species: a colony image dataset, consisting of individual colony images cropped, and a tile image dataset, generated by dividing entire images of the culture plate into tiles. Separate ResNet-50-based models were trained in each dataset, and their outputs were integrated to evaluate the classification performance. Training was conducted using 10,048 colony images and 23,003 tile images collected from 418 strains, and performance was assessed with five-fold cross-validation (K = 5).
resultsThe colony image model achieved a sensitivity of 0.934 and a specificity of 0.993, while the tile image model achieved a sensitivity of 0.918 and a specificity of 0.991. Integration of the two models into an ensemble model further improved performance, yielding a sensitivity of 0.955 and a specificity of 0.995 when tested on 76 independent strains.
conclusionThe ensemble model approach provides high accuracy and robustness, suggesting its potential technical contributions to microbial identification in clinical microbiology 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.