Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41673709›Full record

ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2026

PUMAA: Establishing a protocol for utilizing machine learning in forensic anthropological analyses.

Eman Faisal, Tracy L Rogers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Eman FaisalDepartment of Anthropology, University of Toronto Mississauga, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.
Tracy L RogersDepartment of Anthropology, University of Toronto Mississauga, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of machine learning (ML) models in forensic anthropology (FA) has increased in the last half decade; however, there is a lack of a standardized protocol on how to curate, use, and assess ML models. We introduce PUMAA (A Protocol for Utilizing Machine Learning in Forensic Anthropological Analyses), which includes a flowchart and a checklist that forensic practitioners can follow when creating, using, or assessing ML models for forensic research. The five factors that must be assessed in determining an ML model's true performance are explored. The most common types of supervised ML models are also explained in lay terms and accompanied by visuals to increase accessibility of these complex concepts. Although not exhaustive, examples of information that should be reported have been discussed for seven types of ML models. In addition, their various strengths and limitations are evaluated in order to equip researchers with the necessary tools to make decisions regarding when and how to use ML models. This protocol provides an initial standard for the use of ML in FA.

Indexed as

Forensic AnthropologyMachine LearningHumansbest practicesdecision support toolethicsforensic anthropologymachine learning recommendationsreporting protocolstandardizationsupervised machine learning

Identifiers

PMID41673709
PMCPMC13139820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.