ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2020
Inter-population variation of histomorphometric variables used in the estimation of age-at-death.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Histological age-at-death estimation in white South Africans using stereology.International journal of legal medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Population variation of several microscopic structures used in age-at-death estimation was assessed for three different population samples. The aim of the study was to determine if the need exists for population-specific standards when dealing with individuals of African and European origin. A total sample 223 bone sections from the anterior cortex of the femur (n = 99 black South Africans, n = 94 white South Africans and n = 30 Danish individuals) were analysed using a stereological protocol. Variables assessed included the average number of osteons per grid area (OPD), osteon size and Haversian canal size. ANCOVA was employed for assessment of statistically significant differences. The results indicated that OPD differed significantly between the three groups, but that osteon size was similar for all individuals. Haversian canal size showed unpredictable changes with age and high levels of variation, making it unsuitable to use for age estimation as a single factor. As there are conflicting opinions in the literature on whether to use population-specific equations for the estimation of age-at-death or not, this paper provided additional insight into the use of specific variables and its related variation between groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30968176What 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.