Cited by 7Antibiotic Use and ResistanceBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Confidence-based prediction of antibiotic resistance at the patient level

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Rapid and accurate diagnostics of bacterial infections are necessary for efficient treatment of antibiotic-resistant pathogens. Cultivation-based methods, such as antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST), are limited by bacterial growth rates and seldom yield results before treatment needs to start, increasing patient risk and contributing to antibiotic overprescription. Here, we present a deep-learning method that leverages patient data and available AST results to predict antibiotic susceptibilities that have not yet been measured. After training on three million AST results from 30 European countries, the method achieved an average accuracy of 93% across bacterial species and antibiotics. It predicted susceptibility with an average major error rate below 5% for quinolones, cephalosporins, and carbapenems, and below 8% and 14% for aminoglycosides and penicillins, respectively. Furthermore, the model predicted resistance with an average very major error rate below 10% for cephalosporins, carbapenems, and aminoglycosides, but with higher very major error rates for penicillins and quinolones. We combined the method with conformal prediction and demonstrated accurate estimation of the predictive uncertainty at the patient level. Our results suggest that artificial intelligence-based decision support may offer new means to meet the growing burden of antibiotic resistance. IMPORTANCE: Improved diagnostic tools are vital for maintaining efficient treatment of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and for reducing antibiotic overconsumption. In our research, we introduce a new deep learning-based method capable of predicting untested antibiotic resistance phenotypes. The method uses transformers, a powerful artificial intelligence (AI) technique that efficiently leverages both antibiotic susceptibility tests (AST) and patient data simultaneously. The model produces predictions that can be used as time- and cost-efficient alternatives to results from cultivation-based diagnostic assays. Significantly, our study highlights the potential of AI technologies to address the increasing prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mbio.03431-25

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02724-0 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00326 · DOI
  3. 10.1086/513938 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.12.002 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106184 · DOI
  6. 10.1093/jac/dkw402 · DOI
  7. 10.1378/chest.09-0087 · DOI
  8. 10.1093/jac/dkw469 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.plasmid.2018.09.010 · DOI
  10. 10.1099/mgen.0.000233 · DOI
  11. 10.1128/iai.00283-22 · DOI
  12. 10.1073/pnas.1507442112 · DOI
  13. 10.1038/s41591-019-0503-6 · DOI
  14. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aay5067 · DOI
  15. 10.1126/science.abg9868 · DOI
  16. 10.1186/s12911-021-01488-9 · DOI
  17. 10.1038/s41551-018-0305-z · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1038/s41746-020-00324-0 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.3390/antibiotics12030523 · DOI
  20. 10.3390/antibiotics12030452 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/s41746-020-00367-3 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.3390/antibiotics9020050 · DOI
  23. 10.4258/hir.2021.27.3.214 · DOI
  24. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I. 2017. Attention is all you need. 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2017); Long Beach, CA, USA. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/3f5ee243547dee91fbd053c1c4a845aa-Paper.pdf.
  25. 10.1038/s41587-021-01156-3 · DOI
  26. Vovk V. 2012. Conditional validity of inductive conformal predictors. Asian Conference on Machine Learning. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research.p 475–490
  27. 10.1007/s41666-021-00113-8 · DOI
  28. 10.1086/647952 · DOI · Paper page
  29. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, European Medicines Agency. 2009. The bacterial challenge: time to react: a call to narrow the gap between multidrug-resistant bacteria in the EU and the development of new antibacterial agents. Publications Office.
  30. 10.1016/j.jgar.2019.05.024 · DOI
  31. Vovk V, Gammerman A, Shafer G. 2005. Algorithmic learning in a random world. Springer-Verlag, New York, USA.
  32. Papadopoulos H. 2008. Inductive conformal prediction: theory and application to neural networkstools in artificial intelligence. IntechOpen, Rijeka.
  33. 10.1128/CMR.00047-19 · DOI
  34. 10.1093/jac/dkaa345 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1038/s41467-022-34945-8 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Inda-Díaz, J. S., Johnning, A., Hessel, M., Sjöberg, A., Lokrantz, A., Helldal, L., Jirstrand, M., Svensson, L., & Kristiansson, E.
Affiliations
  • Chalmers University of Technology (SE)
  • Fraunhofer Chalmers Research Centre for Industrial Mathematics (SE)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
  • Inda-Díaz, Juan S.
  • Kristiansson, Erik
Venue
mBio
Published
2026-02-11
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
e0343125-e0343125
ISSN
2150-7511 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7125530211
Cited by
7
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 5
FWCI
28.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • mBio (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Vetenskapsrådet (2018-02835, 2019-03482, 2024-06177)
  • Chalmers Tekniska Högskola (Chalmers Artificial intelligence Research Centre (CHAIR))
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (2031902)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Microbiology (medical) › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Microbiology (medical) › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Keywords
antibiotic resistance prediction, antimicrobial susceptibility testing, deep learning, conformal prediction, forecast uncertainty, transformer models, bacterial infection, clinical decision support, antibiotic overprescription, cephalosporins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides, quinolones, penicillin
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Prediction Algorithms, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Bacteria, Bacterial Infections, Europe, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Drug Resistance, Bacterial

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review