ArticleJournal of anatomy2017
Geometric morphometrics reveals restrictions on the shape of the female os coxae.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating Associations Between Developmental Integration and Physiological Stress.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026Article
- Pelvic Shape Variation in Domestic Rabbits: Influence of Sex, Breed and Reproductive Status.Veterinary medicine and science · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Coxal Bone Measurements for Sex Estimation via Machine Learning.Biology · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional geometric morphometric sex determination of the whole and modeled fragmentary human pubic bone.PloS one · 2022Article
- A novel method of male sex identification of human ancient skeletal remains.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The methodology for sex determination in human skeletal remains depends on the different bone morphologies presented by men and women. Due to their direct implications in reproduction, the whole pelvis, particularly the os coxae, shows different characteristics in either sex. The sacrum and the os coxae constitute the birth canal. In this research study, the os coxae shape is analyzed using geometric morphometrics, providing information on morphology, regardless of size or any other factor beyond the geometry itself. A total of 46 adult ossa coxae from a Spanish archaeological collection were studied using geometric morphometrics. The results show that there is a restriction on the shape of female os coxae. In contrast, male os coxae presents a greater range of variation. The biological reason for this difference is the obstetrical dilemma; a concept defined as the anatomical conflict between bipedalism and the full-term birth of a neonate whose large head requires greater dimensions in the pelvic cavity. Our experimental data reinforce the validity of the obstetrical dilemma as source of the restriction on the shape of female ossa coxae. Additionally, according to the results obtained, size itself does not represent a condition for belonging to one sex or another.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.