ReviewInternational journal of legal medicine2025
Population affinity estimation in forensic anthropology: a South African perspective.
Review in International journal of legal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimation of population affinity from computed tomography-derived pelvic measurements: a comparative study of Indonesian and Japanese population samples.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Histories in bone: Navigating the ethical landscape of human skeletal collections in South Africa.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- YOLO11m-cls applied to sex and age classification based on the radiographic analysis of the nasal aperture.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forensic anthropologists face the complex task of estimating population affinity from skeletal remains, a process that involves inferring culturally constructed "social race" from biological tissues, a challenge further complicated by the nuanced distinction between population affinity and "race". The difficulty in making these estimations arises from the complex interplay between social constructs of race, skeletal morphology, and geographic origin. These factors are further influenced by elements such as assortative mating and institutional racism in regions such as South Africa and the United States. The interaction between cultural factors and biological traits raises the question of whether the challenges in estimating population affinity are inevitable or due to a limited understanding of human variation. To address this knowledge gap, this paper presents a review of population affinity estimation in forensic anthropology, with a focus on the South African context. It provides foundational background and historical insights, explores the medico-legal significance of population affinity, and critically evaluates both traditional and emerging estimation methods. By highlighting regional challenges and recent advancements, this review aims to enhance understanding and contribute to ongoing debates in the field. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.