Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40464901›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2025

Comparison among artificial intelligence-based age estimation from morphological analysis of the pubic symphysis versus experienced and novice practitioners using a new atlas for component labeling.

Javier Irurita Olivares, Juan Carlos Gámez-Granados, Ángel Rubio Salvador, Ana García Reina, Emma Gutiérrez Pascual, Laura Castillo Jiménez, Sergio Damas Arroyo, Oscar Cordón García, Inmaculada Alemán Aguilera

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Javier Irurita OlivaresDepartment of Legal Medicine, Toxicology, and Physical Anthropology. School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. javieri@ugr.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1676-9773
Juan Carlos Gámez-GranadosDepartment of Electronic and Computer Engineering, University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain.
Ángel Rubio SalvadorInstitut Català de Paleoecologia Humana I Evolució Social (IPHES-CERCA), Zona Educacional 4, Campus Sescelades URV (Edifici W3), 43007, Tarragona, Spain.
Ana García ReinaDepartment of Legal Medicine, Toxicology, and Physical Anthropology. School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Emma Gutiérrez PascualDepartment of Legal Medicine, Toxicology, and Physical Anthropology. School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Laura Castillo JiménezDepartment of Legal Medicine, Toxicology, and Physical Anthropology. School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Sergio Damas ArroyoDepartment of Software Engineering and Andalusian Research Institute in Data Science and Computational Intelligence (DaSCI), University of Granada, 18071, Granada, Spain.
Oscar Cordón GarcíaDepartment of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence and Andalusian Research Institute in Data Science and Computational Intelligence (DaSCI), University of Granada, 18071, Granada, Spain.
Inmaculada Alemán AguileraDepartment of Legal Medicine, Toxicology, and Physical Anthropology. School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.

Funding

Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación JDC2022-049955-IMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación PID2021-122916NB-I00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional age estimation methods based on macroscopic observation has been criticized for being excessively dependent on the observer's experience. The aim of this technical note is to propose a new atlas to assist the forensic practitioner in labelling pubic symphysis components. Furthermore, intra- and inter-observer evaluation was conducted using both novice and experienced practitioners. Two experienced and two novice practitioners have used this atlas to label 1,127 identified pubes from autopsies. Furthermore, they have considered the phases of Todd's method (1920) to estimate the age of each pubis. A previously published, semi-automatic artificial intelligence rule-based method based on the C4.5 algorithm has also been used to recommend a specific age-at-death estimation from the human-defined labels, to be compared with the macroscopic age estimation performed by all observers. Linear weighted kappa coefficients indicate that the intra- and inter-observer error when using the new atlas is higher for novice practitioners (Kappa < 0,6) than for experienced practitioners (Kappa > 0,6). Component labeling produces less error than phase assignment following the traditional method only in the case of experienced practitioners. In addition, the artificial intelligence method achieves a global percentage of correct estimates similar to what the four practitioners can achieve. The proposed atlas can be thus considered an effective tool for component labeling. Besides, explainable machine learning techniques could help automate age estimation methods through component analysis. These techniques reduce subjectivity, but it is important that researchers engage in the process to ensure the replicability of the method. Nevertheless, these results must be regarded as preliminary until they are subjected to a more extensive evaluation by a larger cohort of observers.

Indexed as

Age Determination by SkeletonArtificial IntelligencePubic SymphysisAdolescentAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleForensic AnthropologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationYoung AdultAge-at-death estimationArtificial intelligenceComponent labelingTodd's methodTraditional methodology

Identifiers

PMID40464901
PMCPMC12354578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.