ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2026
Using posterior probability informed thresholds to develop best practice recommendations for MorphoPASSE using the innominate, cranial, and combined traits.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers 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
- Using posterior probability informed thresholds to develop best practice recommendations for MorphoPASSE using the innominate, cranial, and combined traits.Journal of forensic sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
MorphoPASSE is a free program that estimates sex based on morphological traits of the innominate, cranium, or a combined set of traits; however, MorphoPASSE does not provide recommendations on which set of traits performs best or recommend a posterior probability (PP) threshold for sex classification in modern forensic casework. The goals of this study were to compare accuracy rates when using different sets of traits and when imposing posterior probability informed thresholds (PPITs). Innominate and cranial trait score data were collected from four modern US documented skeletal collections (n = 285). Accuracy rates for five mutually exclusive PP intervals were calculated, and PP intervals that were significantly different from chance were condensed into PPITs. Using a PPIT of 0.85-1.00 produced high accuracy rates of 97.3% for the innominate traits and 90.2% for the cranial traits. Using the combined set of innominate and cranial traits resulted in significantly higher accuracy (99.6%) with a lower PPIT of 0.75-1.00. Additionally, the combined trait model corrected all previous misclassifications by either producing a correct sex classification or leaving the individual unclassified for failing to reach the required PPIT. Therefore, when both elements are available, the combined set of traits is recommended with a 0.75-1.00 PPIT. Individuals with a PP falling between 0.75 and 1.00 should be reported as consistent with the male or female reference samples, while those falling below should be reported as "could not be estimated." Use of these recommendations will help standardize the use of MorphoPASSE and reporting sex estimation results.
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.