Cited by 50

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Worldwide population variation in pelvic sexual dimorphism: A validation and recalibration of the Klales et al. method

Kenyhercz, Michael W., Klales, Alexandra R., Stull, Kyra E., McCormick, Kyle A., Cole, Stephanie J.·2017·Forensic Science International

Abstract

Sex estimation is an integral aspect of biological anthropology. Correctly estimating sex is the first step to many subsequent analyses, such as estimating living stature or age-at-death. Klales et al. (2012) [6] provided a revised version of the Phenice (1969) [3] method that expanded the original three traits (ventral arc, subpubic concavity/contour, and medial aspect of the ischio-pubic ramus) into five character states to capture varying degrees of expression within each trait. The Klales et al. (2012) [6] method also provided associated probabilities with each sex classification, which is of particular importance in forensic anthropology. However, the external validity of this method must be tested prior to applying the method to different populations from which the method was developed. A total of 1915 innominates from four diverse geographic populations: (1) U.S. Blacks and Whites; (2) South African Blacks and Whites; (3) Thai; and (4) unidentified Hispanic border crossers were scored in accordance with Klales et al. (2012) [6]. Trait scores for each innominate were entered into the equation provided by Klales et al. (2012) [6] for external validation. Additionally, recalibration equations were calculated with logistic regression for each population and for a pooled global sample. Validation accuracies ranged from 87.5% to 95.6% and recalibration equation accuracies ranged from 89.6% to 98% total correct. Pooling all samples and using Klales' et al. (2012) [6] equation…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.05.001

Cites

1 of 1 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: 8

  1. Klales, 2012, A revised method of sexing the human innominate using Phenice’s nonmetric traits and statistical methods, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 149, 104, 10.1002/ajpa.22102 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Gómez-Valdés, 2017, Recalibration of the Klales et al. 2012 method of sexing the human innominate for Mexican populations, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 162, 600, 10.1002/ajpa.23157 · DOI
  3. Klales, 2016, Improving nonmetric sex classification for Hispanic individuals, J Forensic Sci
  4. Press, 1978, Choosing between logistic regression and discriminant Analysis, J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 73, 699, 10.1080/01621459.1978.10480080 · DOI
  5. Mahakkanukrauh, 2015, Craniometric study for sex determination in a Thai population, Anat. Cell Biol., 48, 275, 10.5115/acb.2015.48.4.275 · DOI
  6. L’Abbé, 2013, Application of Fordisc 3.0 to explore differences among crania of North American and South African blacks and whites, J. Forensic Sci., 58, 1579, 10.1111/1556-4029.12198 · DOI
  7. Guégan, 2000, Human fertility variation, size-related obstetrical performance and the evolution of sexual stature dimorphism, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., 267, 2529, 10.1098/rspb.2000.1316 · DOI
  8. Klales, 2016, Secular change in morphological pelvic traits used for sex estimation, J. Forensic Sci., 61, 295, 10.1111/1556-4029.13008 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 50

Metadata

Authors
Kenyhercz, M. W., Klales, A. R., Stull, K. E., McCormick, K. A., & Cole, S. J.
Venue
Forensic Science International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
277
Pages
259.e1-259.e8
ISSN
0379-0738
Cited by
50
References
1
Language
en
Funders
  • National Institute of Justice (2015-DN-BX-K014)
  • U.S. Department of Justice

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