Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37535230›Full record

ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2024

Sex assessment from the pelvis: a test of the Phenice (1969) and Klales et al. (2012) methods.

Vanessa Rae Jager, Constantine Eliopoulos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Vanessa Rae JagerJames Parsons building, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool, L3 3AF, UK.
Constantine EliopoulosJames Parsons building, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool, L3 3AF, UK. C.Eliopoulos@ljmu.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5285-6770

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sex assessment is one of the first steps of routine forensic anthropological examinations and it provides a crucial element to identify a set of human skeletal remains. In bioarchaeological contexts, this assessment is also important, as it helps in the reconstruction of past societies. Sex determination can be achieved by using several morphological or metric traits of the skull and postcranial skeleton, which have been found to have varying degrees of accuracy. In 1969 Phenice proposed a methodology focusing on three traits located on the pubis. These traits were described as either having a female or male morphology with ambiguity being rare. Phenice's method became regularly utilized as it was considered to be reliable. In 2012, Klales and colleagues published a revision of Phenice's method, as they found that it did not capture the variation in the expression of the three traits. Klales and co-authors created a visual ordinal scale of 1-5 for each of the three traits Phenice originally identified, thus adding three extra possible forms of expression. The purpose of the present research was to test both the original and revised methodologies on the same skeletal population in order to evaluate their suitability for the assessment of sex. The Luís Lopes Anthropological collection in Lisbon was used; 117 males and 117 females were scored using both methodologies. The results showed that the original method performed better (96.5% accuracy) than the revised method (92.7%).

Indexed as

Forensic AnthropologySex Determination by SkeletonAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPelvic BonesReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultForensic anthropologyPhenice methodPubic boneSex assessment

Identifiers

PMID37535230
PMCPMC11525382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.