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.
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.
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.
- Applicability of handheld laser scanning for nonmetric skeletal assessment in biological profile estimation: a preliminary two-case study.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
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
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
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.