ArticlePloS one2026
The utility of innominate dry bone weight in age estimation: A new pelvic aging method.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research investigated the relationships between bone weight, chronological age, and biological sex. This study examined 383 innominates from individuals aged 16-93 years to investigate how bone weight (here a proxy for bone mineral density) was patterned throughout the lifespan. Standard osteology laboratory equipment as well as a scale were used to measure innominate height and dry bone weight. Dry bone weight is an imperfect proxy for bone mineral density; however, the phenomenon of decreases in bone weight with age was observed and quantified in this dry bone sample. While both males and females are affected by a slow reduction in bone mineral density over the course of their lifespans, this effect is exaggerated in females and was reflected in the study results. To quantify these changes, the authors created predictive Bayesian linear models to estimate age at death from dry bone weight, height, and biological sex. The best performing model R2 was 0.33, with an average inaccuracy of 9.37 years. Estimated age was within ±10 years of known age for 57.3% of the training sample, and 87.2% of estimated ages at death were within ±20 years of known age. When these models were tested on a smaller modern subsample, the results were both less accurate and less precise, demonstrating a need for validation on expanded modern samples. Overall, these results demonstrate that significant decreases in dry bone weight are associated with increased chronological age in the training sample, particularly in females. This study demonstrates that dry bone weights may be used to support estimates of chronological age; however, they should be applied cautiously, further tested, and only used in concert with well-validated age-at-death estimation methods.
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.