ArticleAmerican journal of biological anthropology2025
A New Method for Whole Bone Analysis of Bilateral Asymmetry.
Article in American journal of biological anthropology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postcranial asymmetry of bones has been mostly studied with linear or angular measurements. Although conclusive, these measurements fail to capture the differences of the entire bone surface. Here, we develop a methodology to measure whole bone bilateral asymmetry from 3D models. We demonstrate the method using the humerus and the second metacarpal. We compare right and left bones of the same individual (bilateral variation) to that of different scans of the same bone (interscan variation) and of the same bone from different individuals (interindividual variation) to show that the method functions and is able to segregate different degrees of variation. The interscan variation is the lowest, while the interindividual variation is the greatest, and the bilateral variation falls between the other two. Visual comparisons, using color maps, illustrate on the bone where the asymmetry is most marked. As expected, the interscan comparisons show very little variation in shape, while the interindividual comparisons reveal extensive variation. In bilateral comparisons, some patterns were observed. In the humerus, the radial groove, the deltoid tuberosity, and the olecranon fossa were usually the most asymmetrical regions. The epiphyses are also more asymmetrical than the diaphysis. For the MC2, the attachments for the palmar interossei muscles and the articular facets with the MC3 were the most asymmetrical regions. These results demonstrate that this new method helps identify areas of asymmetry that would otherwise be difficult to observe.
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.