ArticleForensic sciences research2025
Utility of the morphological scoring of costal cartilage ossification in age estimation of adult Egyptians using multidetector computed tomography.
Article in Forensic sciences research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The feasibility of human embryonic stem cell (hESC)-derived cartilage for tracheoplasty.Regenerative therapy · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Age estimation of adults is a challenging procedure in forensic practice. Inspired by the previous work by Chinese scholars, we established population-specific age estimation models from the osseous and calcified projections (OCPs) of costal cartilages, using three-dimensional volume-rendering technique. A total of 168 clinical CT scans (2 mm slice thickness) were used to develop the sex-specific age prediction models from a sample of Egyptians, comprising 70 females and 98 males, with documented ages between 12 and 85 years. The sample was also used for validating the Chinese model. We reported the differences between the predictive accuracy of the Egyptian (population specific) and Chinese (non-population specific) models. The most accurate age estimation model was stepwise linear regression with standard error of estimates of 10.9 and 11.8 years in males and females, respectively. For the simple linear regression models, the most accurate formula included OCP of the right second costal cartilage in males and OCP of the left third costal cartilage in females with standard error of estimates of 11.2 and 12.2 years, respectively, and mean absolute error (MAE) of 8.8 and 9.6 years, respectively. By comparison, the best accuracy rates produced by the Chinese Key Points: Age differences in calcification form and amount in the seven costal cartilages were found.The best model for males include the second costal cartilage.The best model for females include third or fifth costal cartilages.First OCP is the most accurate in cross-population application regardless of sex.The best OCP in one population is not necessarily the best predictor in both samples.
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.