ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2022
Sex estimation through geometric morphometric analysis of the frontal bone: an assessment in pre-pubertal and post-pubertal modern Spanish population.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex estimation using skull silhouette images from postmortem computed tomography by deep learning.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Mapping sexual dimorphism signal in the human cranium.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Predicting the eyebrow from the orbit using three-dimensional CT imaging in the application of forensic facial reconstruction and identification.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Sexual dimorphism in shape and size of the neurocranium.International journal of legal medicine · 2022Article
- Morphometric analysis of the supraorbital region for sexual dimorphism: A study on Brazilian adult dry skulls.National journal of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sex estimates is a key step of biological profile assessment in a forensic or anthropologic context. In this study, the sexual dimorphism of the frontal bone was analyzed to assess the accuracy of sex estimates using a geometric morphometric approach in a pre-pubertal and post-pubertal sample. The shape of the frontal bone was digitized on the lateral cephalograms of 87 pre-pubertal subjects (42 males, mean age 10.14, SD ± 1.48 years; 45 females mean age 10.02, SD ± 1.11 years) and 103 post-pubertal ones (53 males, mean age 29.33 SD ± 11.88 years; 50 females, mean age 26.77 SD ± 11.07 years). A generalized Procrustes analysis (GPA) was performed for shape analyses, filtering the effects of position, rotation, translation, and size. A principal component analysis (PCA) was performed on the GPA transformed variables, and a multiple logistic regression model was used to assess the accuracy of sex estimates. In both age groups, the average size of the centroid was significantly larger in males. The females presented shapes with a shorter distance between P2 (glabella) and P1 (supratoral) and a general narrowing of the structure on the sagittal plane. In the pre-pubertal group, the shape difference was not statistically significant. In the post-pubertal group, the mean shape was significantly different between the sexes. The method displayed a high accuracy for sex estimates (88.7% males, 90.3% females) also when applied in a validation sample (82.6% males and 94.1% females). The described morphometric analysis of the frontal bone is based on a limited number of landmarks, which allows sex estimates with high accuracy in post-pubertal subjects, while it is not applicable in pre-pubertal ones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.