SynthesisForensic science, medicine, and pathology2025
The mastoid triangle (Ma-Ast-Po) as a sexually dimorphic feature - a systematic review of 1604 human skulls and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The mastoid triangle is the area between the craniometric landmarks Mastoidale (Ma), Asterion (Ast) and Porion (Po), which has been studied in the field of physical anthropology as an alleged tool for sexual dimorphism. The evidence in the current scientific literature, however, is disputable. This systematic review aimed to find out how safe is the mastoid triangle for sexual dimorphism. A research protocol submitted to PROSPERO (CRD42023488216) was designed based on PRISMA-P. Pubmed, SciELO, LiLACS, LIVIVO, Open Gray and Open Access Theses and Dissertations were searched with structured strategies. The Joanna Briggs Institute manual was followed and the critical appraisal checklist for cross-sectional studies was used. The search found 14 eligible studies out of 2148 initially screened. The combined sample consisted of 1604 human skulls. Eight studies (57,14%) clearly encouraged the use of the mastoid triangle for sexual dimorphism, while three (21,42%) advised against it. All the studies had a low risk of bias (75-100%). The standardized mean difference between male and females was between 1.00 and 1.42 without statistically significant differences between geographic regions (p > 0.05). Expressive heterogeneity and large confidence intervals were detected, showing great variability across studies. A country-specific subgroup meta-analysis revealed lack of statistically significant differences based on geographic regions. This systematic review showed low level of evidence to support the use of the mastoid triangle as a tool for sexual dimorphism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40120060What 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.