Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A revised method of sexing the human innominate using Phenice's nonmetric traits and statistical methods

Klales, Alexandra R., Ousley, Stephen D., Vollner, Jennifer M.·2012·American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Abstract

The traits of the pubis described by Phenice (Am J Phys Anthropol 30 (1969) 297–302) have been used extensively by physical anthropologist for sex estimation. This study investigates all three of Phenice's characteristics in an approach similar to Walker's (Am J Phys Anthropol 136 (2008) 39–50) study using observations from the cranium and mandible. The ventral arc, the subpubic contour, and the medial aspect of the ischio‐pubic ramus were scored on a five‐point ordinal scale from a sample of 310 adult, left innominates of known ancestry and sex from the Hamann‐Todd Human Osteological Collection and the W.M. Bass Donated Skeletal Collection. Four observers with varying levels of experience blindly scored each trait using new descriptions and illustrations adapted from those originally created by Phenice. The scores were then analyzed with ordinal logistic regression. Using all three traits for sex classification, the mean correct classification rate was 94.5% cross‐validated for experienced observers. Intra‐ and interobserver error in trait scoring was low for all three traits and agreement levels ranged from moderate to substantial. Tests of the method on an independent validation sample provided a classification accuracy of 86.2%. This revision of the Phenice (Am J Phys Anthropol 30 (1969) 297–302) technique is a reliable and valid method of sex estimation from the human innominate that meets the Daubert criteria for court admissibility. 2012. Am J Phys Anthropol, © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.22102

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. 10.1002/ajpa.1330830406 · DOI
  2. Bass WM, 2005, Human osteology: a laboratory and field manual
  3. 10.1002/ajpa.10012 · DOI
  4. Byers SN, 2005, Introduction to forensic anthropology
  5. 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01374.x · DOI
  6. 10.1002/ajpa.1330310202 · DOI
  7. 10.1080/03014467500000691 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/ajpa.1330610305 · DOI
  9. Foster KR, 1999, Judging science: scientific knowledge and the federal courts
  10. 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01118.x · DOI
  11. 10.1002/ajpa.1330480118 · DOI
  12. Kerley ER, 1977, Forensic medicine, V. II
  13. Klales AR, 2010, The utility of Cohen's Kappa for testing observer error in discrete data and alternatives, Proc Am Acad Forensic Sci, 16, 340
  14. Klales AR, 2009, A new metric procedure for the estimation of sex and ancestry from the human innominate, Proc Am Acad Forensic Sci, 15, 311
  15. Kenyhercz MK, 2012, Sex estimation using pubic bone morphology in a modern South African sample: a test of the Klales et al. method, Am J Phys Anthropol, 54, 179
  16. Krogman WM, 1986, The human skeleton in forensic medicine
  17. 10.1080/00401706.1968.10490530 · DOI
  18. 10.2307/2529310 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1002/ajpa.1330980106 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/ajpa.1330280106 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/ajpa.1330790112 · DOI
  22. 10.1007/BF02436580 · DOI
  23. 10.1520/JFS12974J · DOI
  24. 10.1520/JFS14992J · DOI
  25. 10.2105/AJPH.2004.046250 · DOI
  26. National Academy of Sciences, 2009, Strengthening forensic sciences in the United States: a path forward
  27. 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.09.074 · DOI
  28. PengC‐YJ SoT‐SH.2002. Logistic regression analysis and reporting: a primer. Understanding Stat 1:31–70. · DOI
  29. 10.1080/01621459.1978.10480080 · DOI
  30. R Development Core Team, 2011, R: a language and environment for statistical computing Version 2.13.0
  31. 10.1017/CBO9780511661655 · DOI
  32. Rosenberg KR, 1986, The functional significance of Neandertal pubic morphology. Doctoral dissertation
  33. SAS Institute, 2002, SAS/STAT1 Version 9.0
  34. Schon R, 1979, Tests on the reliability of the Phenice method and selected, pelvimetric dimensions for sexing human innominates: a preliminary report based on known sex skeletons from the J.B.C. Grant Collection. Unpublished manuscript
  35. 2005, SPSS for Windows, Rel. 14.0.
  36. Stewart TD, 1979, Essentials of forensic anthropology
  37. Sutherland LD, 1987, Use of the ventral arc in sex determination of the os pubis. [Abstract] Proc Am Acad Forensic Sci
  38. 10.1520/JFS13051J · DOI
  39. Tabachnick BG, 2001, Using multivariate statistics
  40. 10.1002/ajpa.1330040102 · DOI
  41. 10.1520/JFS15200J · DOI
  42. VollnerJM.2009. Metric assessment of sex and ancestry in the human innominate. Master's Thesis. Erie PA: Mercyhurst College.
  43. Vollner JM, 2009, Sexing of the human innominate using non‐metric traits and statistical analysis, Am J Phys Anthropol, 138, 263
  44. 10.1002/ajpa.20776 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Klales, A. R., Ousley, S. D., & Vollner, J. M.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-06-19
Volume
149
Issue
1
Pages
104-114
ISSN
  • 0002-9483
  • 1096-8644
Cited by
277
References
4
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