ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024
Exploring cranial macromorphoscopic variation and classification accuracy in a South African sample.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histories in bone: Navigating the ethical landscape of human skeletal collections in South Africa.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- Evaluating classification approaches for population affinity estimation in a contemporary South African CT-derived sample: an automatic landmarking-based approach.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Population affinity estimation in forensic anthropology: a South African perspective.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Topographic and morphometric characterization of the humerii nutrient foramina and their implications for fracture repair and healing.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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To date South African forensic anthropologists are only able to successfully apply a metric approach to estimate population affinity when constructing a biological profile from skeletal remains. While a non-metric, or macromorphoscopic approach exists, limited research has been conducted to explore its use in a South African population. This study aimed to explore 17 cranial macromorphoscopic traits to develop improved methodology for the estimation of population affinity among black, white and coloured South Africans and for the method to be compliant with standards of best practice. The trait frequency distributions revealed substantial group variation and overlap, and not a single trait can be considered characteristic of any one population group. Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests demonstrated significant population differences for 13 of the 17 traits. Random forest modelling was used to develop classification models to assess the reliability and accuracy of the traits in identifying population affinity. Overall, the model including all traits obtained a classification accuracy of 79% when assessing population affinity, which is comparable to current craniometric methods. The variable importance indicates that all the traits contributed some information to the model, with the inferior nasal margin, nasal bone contour, and nasal aperture shape ranked the most useful for classification. Thus, this study validates the use of macromorphoscopic traits in a South African sample, and the population-specific data from this study can potentially be incorporated into forensic casework and skeletal analyses in South Africa to improve population affinity estimates.
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.