Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18005121›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2008

Radiographic assessment of the index to ring finger ratio (2D:4D) in adults.

J Robertson, W Zhang, J J Liu, K R Muir, R A Maciewicz, M Doherty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Second-to-Fourth Digit (2D:4D) Ratio as A Risk Factor for Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

J RobertsonAcademic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, UK.
W Zhang
J J Liu
K R Muir
R A Maciewicz
M Doherty

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The smaller index to ring finger (2D:4D) ratio has been considered as a 'male finger pattern' and is associated with sporting ability and a number of conditions. However, the ratio may vary according to what is measured, the hand selected and the method used. This study aimed to determine: (1) which bones (phalanges, metacarpals or both) account for variation in the 2D:4D ratio; (2) whether the ratio shows right-left symmetry or relates to hand dominance; and (3) the correlation between visual classification and measured determinations of the ratio based on radiographs. Hand radiographs obtained as part of a large osteoarthritis genetic study were examined. Each hand was classified visually into three types according to the relative length of the index and ring finger: Type 1 (index longer than ring), Type 2 (index = ring) and Type 3 (index shorter than ring). For both index and ring fingers we measured (1) from base of proximal to tip of distal phalanx and (2) metacarpal length. Reproducibility of the classification and measurements were examined using kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient; symmetry between left and right hands was examined using Bland and Altman's agreement analysis; and correlation between visual classification and 2D:4D ratio data was analysed using the anova linearity test. Data were obtained from 3172 radiographs (1636 men, 1536 women; mean age 67 +/- 7.9 years, range 45-86 years). Prevalence of Type 3 hand was 61% in men and 37% in women (P < 0.001). Men had smaller 2D:4D ratios than women for phalanges (0.908 versus 0.922, P < 0.01), metacarpals (1.152 versus 1.157, P < 0.01) and the sum of phalanges plus metacarpals (1.005 versus 1.015, P < 0.01). The mean difference between right and left was -0.001 (95% limit of agreement -0.035, 0.032) for the phalangeal ratio and 0.003 (95% limit of agreement -0.051 to 0.057) for the metacarpal ratio. The 2D:4D ratio did not associate with handedness or age. There was a linear trend between the visual classification of hand type and the 2D:4D ratio data (P < 0.001). More technical difficulties (due to positioning, finger trauma, osteoarthritis) were encountered with the phalangeal ratio and visual categorization than with the metacarpal ratio: the latter could be measured in 98.7% of the study population. We concluded that measured 2D:4D ratios and visual categorization can be derived from hand radiographs. The phalanges and metacarpals both contribute to the variation in 2D:4D ratio with smaller ratios observed in men than in women. The ratio is symmetrical with only very small differences between right and left hands. Visual classification may be a useful simple tool for future epidemiological studies but is more prone to bias from positioning than direct measurement. If radiographs are used for this purpose, we recommend the metacarpal ratio with measurement of a single index hand or an average of both as it is least affected by bias from malpositioning, trauma or common joint disease.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsAgedAged, 80 and overAnthropometryCohort StudiesFemaleFinger PhalangesFunctional LateralityHumansMaleMetacarpal BonesMiddle AgedOsteoarthritisRadiographyReference ValuesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID18005121
PMCPMC2423386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.