ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Validation of an AI-Driven Sputum Analysis Platform for Accurate and Reliable Tuberculosis Detection in South-Western Uganda.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) sputum smear microscopy remains an accessible method for detecting acid-fast bacilli (AFB), but its interpretation is dependent on specimen quality and trained microscopy personnel. Artificial intelligence (AI) may provide a microscopy reading aid that supports consistent identification of AFB-positive and AFB-negative smear images. Objective: To evaluate transfer-learning deep learning models for classification of AFB-positive and AFB-negative digitized ZN-stained sputum smear images generated in a Ugandan regional referral laboratory. Methods: A retrospective laboratory-based cross-sectional study used 512 archived digitized ZN-stained sputum smear images from Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital. The dataset contained 256 AFB-positive and 256 AFB-negative images and was partitioned by stratified sampling into training (n=358), validation (n=77), and an internal hold-out test set (n=77). ResNet-50 V2, DenseNet-121, and Swin Transformer-Tiny models were trained using ImageNet-pretrained weights in PyTorch. Performance was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), F1-score, and ROC-AUC. Results: On the internal test set, Swin Transformer-Tiny achieved 97.40% accuracy, 97.37% sensitivity, 97.44% specificity, 97.37% PPV, 97.44% NPV, 97.37% F1-score, and ROC-AUC 0.9939. DenseNet-121 achieved 88.31% accuracy, 84.21% sensitivity, 92.31% specificity, and ROC-AUC 0.9730. ResNet-50 V2 achieved 85.71% accuracy, 81.58% sensitivity, 89.74% specificity, and ROC-AUC 0.9555. Wilson 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the threshold-based metrics. Conclusion: The models demonstrated promising internal performance for classification of microscopy-defined AFB status. Swin Transformer-Tiny had the highest observed performance, but the small, balanced, single-centre internal test set and use of routine microscopy labels rather than an independent microbiological reference standard limit clinical interpretation. The platform should therefore be considered an AI-assisted microscopy reading aid rather than an autonomous tuberculosis diagnostic system. Prospective, multicentre evaluation using patient/specimen-level separation, independent microbiological reference standards, and multiple blinded readers is required before clinical deployment.
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.