ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024
Validating the use of clinical MSCT scans for cranial nonmetric sex estimation in a contemporary Indonesian population.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2024. 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.
- Two-group interlandmark distance analysis for skeletal sex estimation using resampling and posterior probability contour plots.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Geometric Morphometric Characterization of Facial Sexual Dimorphism in Juveniles.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Deep learning versus human assessors: forensic sex estimation from three-dimensional computed tomography scans.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Nonmetric sex estimation in a contemporary Indonesian population: a validation study using clinical pelvic MSCT scans.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Prioritizing a high posterior probability threshold leading to low error rate over high classification accuracy: the validity of MorphoPASSE software for cranial morphological sex estimation in a contemporary population.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is renewed interest in Asia for the development of forensic anthropological standards, partly due to the need for population-specific models to maintain high classification accuracies. At present, there are no known studies utilising morphoscopic standards specific to the Indonesian population. Craniometric analyses can often be time-consuming; morphoscopic assessments are quicker and are also known to be reliable and accurate. One of the most utilised morphoscopic standards for the estimation of skeletal sex is that of Walker (2008). Its application across population groups demonstrated reduced accuracies outside of the United States; population-specific predictive models would thus serve to improve the identification process of unknown skeletal remains. Digital imaging also allows for the validation of standards on a contemporary population and is an appropriate proxy to physical skeletal material.The present study quantifies the applicability of the Walker standard to a contemporary Indonesian population. A total of 200 cranial MSCT scans from a hospital in Makassar were analysed using OsiriX®. Scoring was performed in accordance with the Walker standard. Five univariate and nine multivariate predictive models were derived using single trait and multi-trait combinations. The best performing univariate model included the glabella, with a total classification accuracy of 82.0% and a sex bias of 14.6%. Classification accuracy with all traits considered was at 95.2% for females and 82.8% for males with a sex bias of 12.5%. These results provide forensic practitioners in Indonesia with an appropriate morphoscopic sex estimation standard, strengthening their capabilities in the field and improving judicial outcomes.
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.