Jordanian Journal of Informatics and Computing

ISSN: 3080-6828 (Online)

A Confidence-Aware and Safety-Constrained AI Framework for Antimicrobial Resistance Decision Support

by 

Hussein Ali Hussein Al Naffakh

PDF logoPDF

Published: 2026/06/16

Abstract

The issue of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a significant threat to clinical decision-making because of dissimilar laboratory practices, incomplete antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results, and patient-specific safety limitations. The majority of current artificial intelligence (AI)-based AMR tools focus on predictive accuracy in ideal situations and only offer few mechanisms to deal with uncertainty or avoid unsafe advice. This paper suggests a confidence-sensitive and safety-constrained AI-based decision support model that can work in practice when faced with incomplete data in the real world. The framework combines calibration prediction of resistance, ability to abstain with confidence, patient tailored filtering of safety, and aligning of guidelines with interpretation to control when to issue or withhold a recommendation. A strength test was conducted by scenario-based data availability configuration which emulates typical laboratory constraints. The findings show that the suggested framework consistently performs reliably on accepted cases and abstains correctly in the case of uncertainty and produces safer alternative recommendations in the case of contraindication. The proposed approach can make AMR prediction a patient-safe, trans-ogram, and reliability-focused decision support system that enables the use of antimicrobial stewardship in everyday practice.

Keywords

Antimicrobial resistanceClinical decision supportConfidence-aware AISafety constraintsData incompletenessand Machine learning.

Doi Link

https://doi.org/10.63180/jjic.thestap.2026.1.6

How to Cite the Article

Ali Hussein Al Naffakh, H. (2026). A Confidence-Aware and Safety-Constrained AI Framework for Antimicrobial Resistance Decision Support. Jordanian Journal of Informatics and Computing, 2026(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.63180/jjic.thestap.2026.1.6

A Confidence-Aware and Safety-Constrained AI Framework for Antimicrobial Resistance Decision Support is licensed under CC BY 4.0CCBY

References

  1. Murray, C. J., Ikuta, K. S., Sharara, F., Swetschinski, L., Aguilar, G. R., Gray, A., ... & Tasak, N. (2022). Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. The lancet, 399(10325), 629-655.
  2. World Health Organization. (2022). Global antimicrobial resistance and use surveillance system (GLASS) report 2022. World Health Organization.
  3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. (2024). Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (34th ed.; CLSI supplement M100). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.
  4. Kahlmeter, G., Giske, C. G., Kirn, T. J., & Sharp, S. E. (2020). European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST): Technical notes on antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 26(5), 511–514.
  5. Kim, J. I., Maguire, F., Tsang, K. K., Gouliouris, T., Peacock, S. J., McAllister, T. A., ... & Beiko, R. G. (2022). Machine learning for antimicrobial resistance prediction: current practice, limitations, and clinical perspective. Clinical microbiology reviews, 35(3), e00179-21.
  6. Sakagianni, A., Koufopoulou, C., Feretzakis, G., Kalles, D., Verykios, V. S., & Myrianthefs, P. (2023). Using machine learning to predict antimicrobial resistance―a literature review. Antibiotics, 12(3), 452.
  7. Kompa, B., Snoek, J., & Beam, A. L. (2021). Second opinion needed: Communicating uncertainty in medical machine learning. npj Digital Medicine, 4(1), 4.
  8. Begoli, E., Bhattacharya, T., & Kusnezov, D. (2019). The need for uncertainty quantification in machine-assisted medical decision making. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(1), 20–23.
  9. Pulia, M. S., et al. (2020). The emergency department as a steward of antibiotic use in the era of COVID-19 and beyond. Academic Emergency Medicine, 27(10), 1047–1052.
  10. Barlam, T. F., Cosgrove, S. E., Abbo, L. M., MacDougall, C., Schuetz, A. N., Septimus, E. J., ... & Trivedi, K. K. (2016). Implementing an antibiotic stewardship program: guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. Clinical infectious diseases, 62(10), e51-e77.
  11. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. (2024). Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters (Version 14.0).
  12. Sutton, R. T., Pincock, D., Baumgart, D. C., Sadowski, D. C., Fedorak, R. N., & Kroeker, K. I. (2020). An overview of clinical decision support systems: Benefits, risks, and strategies for success. npj Digital Medicine, 3(1), 17.
  13. Liu, M., Li, S., Yuan, H., Ong, M. E. H., Ning, Y., Xie, F., ... & Liu, N. (2023). Handling missing values in healthcare data: A systematic review of deep learning-based imputation techniques. Artificial intelligence in medicine, 142, 102587.
  14. Varoquaux, G., & Cheplygina, V. (2022). Machine learning for medical imaging: Methodological failures and recommendations for the future. npj Digital Medicine, 5(1), 48.
  15. Beam, A. L., & Kohane, I. S. (2018). Big data and machine learning in health care. JAMA, 319(13), 1317–1318.
  16. Steyerberg, E. W. (2019). Clinical prediction models: A practical approach to development, validation, and updating (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16399-0
  17. Guo, C., Pleiss, G., Sun, Y., & Weinberger, K. Q. (2017). On calibration of modern neural networks. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning (Vol. 70, pp. 1321–1330). PMLR.
  18. World Health Organization. (2021). Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. World Health Organization.