Test of revised method of age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to test a revised method of age estimation based on the morphology of the auricular surface recently proposed by Buckberry and Chamberlain ([2002] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 119:231–239). The study sample consists of 309 individuals of known sex, age, and race from the Terry and Huntington Collections. Auricular surfaces were scored using the revised technique to determine whether it is equally applicable to both sexes as well as blacks and whites. The auricular surfaces of the same individuals were also scored using the original method of auricular surface scoring developed by Lovejoy et al. ([1985] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 68:15–28) to determine whether the revised technique is comparable to the original method in terms of accuracy. Results show that the revised method is equally applicable to males and females as well as blacks and whites. The revised method is less accurate than the original method for individuals between 20–49 years of age, but more accurate for individuals between 50–69 years of age. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several age-at-death estimation methods have been created with reference samples from North America and Europe.
“Several age‐at‐death estimation methods have been created with reference samples from North America and Europe [8, 9, 10].”
From Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa (2026) · cites this paper as [10]
Cites
Age changes in the pubic bone. I. The male white pubis
Todd, T. W. (1920) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330030301 · Cited by 733 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa
Mkhonza, S. S., Ngubane, N. P., Aladeyelu, O. S., & Rennie, C. O. (2026) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/1556-4029.70219
- Authors
- Mulhern, D. M., & Jones, E. B.
- Venue
- American Journal of Physical Anthropology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-05-12
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-65
- ISSN
- 0002-9483
- 1096-8644
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review