PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 16, 2026Journal of Fungi0 citationsOpen Access

Can Artificial Intelligence Optimize the Early Diagnosis of Invasive Candidiasis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

HAHugo AlmeidaRPRosa Juana Tejera PérezMAMontserrat Alonso-Sardón

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the effectiveness of artificial intelligence models in diagnosing invasive candidiasis in high-risk patients.
  • Conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of AI predictive models for candidemia.
  • Searched multiple databases for studies involving hospitalized immunocompromised patients.
  • Extracted data on study characteristics, model details, validation strategies, and diagnostic accuracy.
  • Performed a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis for compatible candidemia models.
  • Evaluated risk of bias and certainty of evidence using PROBAST and GRADE methodologies.
  • Eight studies were included in the review, primarily using retrospective hospital data.
  • Pooled sensitivity for candidemia prediction was 81.3% with a 95% confidence interval [72.9–87.6%].
  • Pooled specificity was 81.6% with a 95% confidence interval [68.4–90.1%].
  • Most models exhibited high negative predictive values, indicating effectiveness in ruling out disease.
  • Positive predictive values were modest due to low event prevalence, and biases affected study interpretations.

Abstract

The early diagnosis of invasive candidiasis remains challenging in immunocompromised and other high-risk patients, prompting interest in artificial intelligence models for assisting clinical decision-making. We conducted a PROSPERO-registered systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence-based predictive models for the early identification of invasive Candida infections. We searched multiple databases for studies reporting model performance in hospitalized immuno-compromised patients. Data on study characteristics, model details, validation strategy, and diagnostic accuracy were extracted. A bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was performed for candidemia prediction models with compatible data. Eight studies met inclusion criteria. Models were typically developed using retrospective hospital data with heterogeneous populations and predictors. Five candidemia studies provided threshold-based performance data for meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for candidemia prediction were 81.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72.9–87.6%) and 81.6% (95% CI 68.4–90.1%), respectively. Most models achieved high negative predictive values, whereas positive predictive values were modest, reflecting low event prevalence. The risk of bias was generally moderate to high (PROBAST), and the certainty of evidence was low (GRADE) due to study limitations and indirectness. AI models show promise for early candidemia identification with moderate diagnostic accuracy. They may be useful as decision-support tools, but further multicenter prospective validation is needed before routine clinical adoption.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Almeida et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6992b4139b75e639e9b08e84https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12020138
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Advancements in Artificial Intelligence-Based Diagnostic Tools Used to Detect Fungal Infections: A Systematic Review2026 · 3 citations
  2. 2A machine learning model for early candidemia prediction in the intensive care unit: Clinical application2024 · 1 citations
  3. 3Early Detection of Sepsis Using Artificial Intelligence in Intensive Care Units: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis2025
  4. 4Evaluating Artificial Intelligence for Sepsis Prediction in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis2026 · 2 citations
  5. 5Artificial intelligence for oral cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of image-based and non-imaging models2026