ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Forensic age estimation and legal age thresholds classification based on the elbow MRI and data mining in a Chinese population.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study developed and evaluated data mining models for age estimation and legal age thresholds classification based on elbow MRI in a contemporary Chinese population. A total of 867 patients (614 males and 253 females) aged 30 years or younger were retrospectively included, and T1-weighted coronal elbow MRI images were assessed by experts using five age-related indicators. Multiple data mining models were constructed, with mean absolute error (MAE) as the primary performance metric. Both intra- and inter-observer agreements demonstrated good reliability. In external validation, the optimal model achieved the lowest MAE of 2.9845 years in males and 2.9767 years in females, compared to 2.0471 years and 3.0477 years, respectively, in internal validation. For classification at the 12-, 14-, 16-, and 18-year threshold, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) exceeded 0.90 across all models. Notably, these models also attained the highest specificity (defined as the proportion of individuals truly below the threshold correctly identified) reaching 1.000, 1.000, 0.970, and 0.800 in males, and 1.000, 1.000, 0.857, and 0.750 in females at the respective thresholds. In conclusion, the proposed models show promise in estimating age and classifying legal thresholds, with performance that is generally comparable to that of other MRI-based approaches in certain contexts. These preliminary findings suggest that elbow MRI may serve as a useful tool for age assessment in the Chinese population, though further validation is warranted to confirm its generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41521245What 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.