ArticleScientific reports2023
Comparison of measurements made on dry bone and digital measurements in Anatomage for the sacral bone in a Spanish population.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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.
- Stature prediction using anthropometric measurements of the hand in a sample of adult Egyptian, Arab, and Malaysian populations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of osteometry for human identification is a key element in the field of forensic sciences. Currently, the osteometry focuses on the use of digital techniques such as photography or 3D scans, to study and measure bones, offering advantages like easy access, preservation of bones, and worldwide collaboration possibilities. The study aims to analyze whether digital tools such as Anatomage can be used to collect reliable data. The study compares measurements of the sacral bone from 41 individuals from Orgiva Collection using both traditional and digital methods. The variables analyzed were described previously, including landmarks and positions, and were coded by differentiating the measurements between dry bone (caliper) and digital measurement (Anatomage). Results indicate minimal differences between digital and dry bone measurements, with only one variable showing a significant differences in the effect size analysis (d > 0.80). The TEM analysis showed four variables as non-acceptable (rTEM > 1.5), possibly due to the landmark location or the experience using the tool to locate landmarks. Digital resources are valuable for morphometric evaluations and human identification within forensic sciences. However, caution is necessary to ensure accurate landmark localization and validate these tools across various bone types and larger sample sizes.
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.