Cited by 91

Test of revised method of age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium

Mulhern, Dawn M., Jones, Erica B.·2005·American Journal of Physical Anthropology

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

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.10410

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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