Back

Cultryx: Precision Diagnostic Stewardship for Blood Cultures Using Machine Learning

Marshall, N. P.; Chen, W.; Amrollahi, F.; Nateghi Haredasht, F.; Maddali, M. V.; Ma, S. P.; Zahedivash, A.; Black, K. C.; Chang, A.; Deresinski, S. C.; Goldstein, M. K.; Asch, S. M.; Banaei, N.; Chen, J. H.

2026-03-04 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.02.27.26347214 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe 2024 blood culture bottle shortage brought diagnostic resource allocation to the forefront, reflecting persistent, foundational challenges with low-value testing and empiric treatment approaches under clinical uncertainty. ObjectiveTo determine whether a machine learning approach using electronic medical record data can predict bacteremia more effectively than existing systems and practices to guide diagnostic testing and empiric treatment strategies. MethodsIn a retrospective cohort of 101,812 adult emergency department encounters (2015-2025), we first established an idealized cognitive baseline by evaluating physician and generative AI (GPT-5) application of the professional society-endorsed Fabre framework on a validation subset. We then trained an XGBoost model (Cultryx) on the full cohort to predict bacteremia, benchmarking its performance against real-world clinical heuristics (SIRS, Shapiro Rule). ResultsFor the idealized baseline, physicians applying the Fabre framework achieved 95.7% sensitivity, but GPT-5 automation failed to replicate this standard (71.6% sensitivity). In real-world benchmarking, Cultryx outperformed all clinical heuristics (AUROC 0.810). SIRS lacked specificity (41.2%), driving diagnostic overuse, while the Shapiro Rule lacked sensitivity (70.2%), missing ~30% of bacteremia cases. In contrast, when calibrated to a strict 95% sensitivity target, Cultryx achieved the highest culture volume deferral rate (26.2%, deferring ~ 15,872 bottles with predicted negative results) while maintaining a 98.9% negative predictive value. Cultryxscore, a simplified bedside tool, retained a 20.8% deferral rate. ConclusionsMachine learning provides a superior, data-driven alternative to mainstream clinical heuristics for predicting bacteremia. By maximizing culture deferment without compromising pathogen detection, Cultryx can conserve diagnostic resources, reduce unnecessary empiric antibiotic exposure, and systematically elevate patient safety. SummaryCultryx, a machine learning model for blood culture stewardship, outperforms standard clinical heuristics in predicting bacteremia. This approach could reduce culture utilization by over 26% while preserving pathogen detection, conserving diagnostic resources, reducing unnecessary antibiotic exposure, and elevating patient safety.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.8%
2
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.2%
3
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.3%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
5
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.0%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 35%
4.0%
7
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.1%
8
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
9
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
10
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
50% of probability mass above
11
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
13
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.1%
14
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 32%
1.7%
17
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
18
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
19
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
20
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
21
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
22
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
23
American Journal of Infection Control
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
24
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
25
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
27
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
28
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
30
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%