ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
A robust forensic reasoning to estimate the minimum number of individuals: the certain exclusion.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Estimating the Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) in commingled skeletal assemblages is a core task in forensic and archaeological anthropology. Traditional methods, based on the frequency of lateralized elements, often suffer from underestimation due to fragmentation and morphological similarity. This study introduces a new MNI estimation method grounded in the principle of certain exclusion (with a 99% confidence interval), which focuses on detecting osteometric incompatibilities between elements rather than identifying matches. We developed linear regression models based on a large international dataset (n = 2,969 individuals) to generate 99% prediction intervals between long bone measurements. A recursive protocol, termed Allometric Research by Exclusion (RAE), was implemented to isolate bones that cannot belong to the same individual. The method was validated via bootstrap simulations using independent samples from the Milano and Pretoria Bone collections. Across all assemblages, the exclusion-based MNI estimates were consistently higher than those obtained by frequency-based methods, and more closely approximated the real number of individuals. This trend was especially clear in small to mid-sized assemblages, where precise MNI estimation is most critical. The exclusion method offers a statistically grounded, replicable, and conservative approach to MNI estimation. Its integration into forensic and archaeological workflows may enhance the accuracy and defensibility of population reconstruction in complex contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42321581What 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.