Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27437698›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2017

Disregarding population specificity: its influence on the sex assessment methods from the tibia.

Anežka Kotěrová, Jana Velemínská, Ján Dupej, Hana Brzobohatá, Aleš Pilný, Jaroslav Brůžek

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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.

Anežka KotěrováDepartment of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Viničná 7, Praha 2, 128 43, Prague, Czech Republic. koterova.a@seznam.cz.
Jana VelemínskáDepartment of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Viničná 7, Praha 2, 128 43, Prague, Czech Republic.
Ján DupejDepartment of Software and Computer Science, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague, Malostranské nám. 25, 118 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Hana BrzobohatáDepartment of Prehistory, Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Science, Letenská 4, 118 01, Praha, Czech Republic.
Aleš PilnýDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Karlovo náměstí 13, 121 35, Prague 2, Czech Republic.
Jaroslav BrůžekDepartment of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Viničná 7, Praha 2, 128 43, Prague, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forensic anthropology has developed classification techniques for sex estimation of unknown skeletal remains, for example population-specific discriminant function analyses. These methods were designed for populations that lived mostly in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Their level of reliability or misclassification is important for practical use in today's forensic practice; it is, however, unknown. We addressed the question of what the likelihood of errors would be if population specificity of discriminant functions of the tibia were disregarded. Moreover, five classification functions in a Czech sample were proposed (accuracies 82.1-87.5 %, sex bias ranged from -1.3 to -5.4 %). We measured ten variables traditionally used for sex assessment of the tibia on a sample of 30 male and 26 female models from recent Czech population. To estimate the classification accuracy and error (misclassification) rates ignoring population specificity, we selected published classification functions of tibia for the Portuguese, south European, and the North American populations. These functions were applied on the dimensions of the Czech population. Comparing the classification success of the reference and the tested Czech sample showed that females from Czech population were significantly overestimated and mostly misclassified as males. Overall accuracy of sex assessment significantly decreased (53.6-69.7 %), sex bias -29.4-100 %, which is most probably caused by secular trend and the generally high variability of body size. Results indicate that the discriminant functions, developed for skeletal series representing geographically and chronologically diverse populations, are not applicable in current forensic investigations. Finally, implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Indexed as

Sex Determination by SkeletonAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnatomic LandmarksDiscriminant AnalysisFemaleForensic AnthropologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerTibiaDiscriminant function analysisForensic anthropology population dataGAME methodPopulation specificitySex determinationTibia

Identifiers

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.