The determination of male adult age at death by central and posterior coxal analysis—a preliminary study
Abstract
In forensic anthropological analysis, the pelvis is of particular interest as it is often a comparatively well-preserved part of the skeleton. This study in age determination uses the acetabulum, the central element of the pelvis, as a complement to the examination of the auricular surface. The test sample consisted of 30 individuals. First, the authors studied the auricular surface using the Lovejoy criteria. Second, they isolated four criteria based on chronological changes in the acetabulum. Third, they conducted an evaluation of each of these variables. The study examines the correlation between these criteria and the age of the individuals. A significant correlation was found between the acetabular criteria and age, and between the acetabular criteria and the Lovejoy criteria of the auricular surface. For forensic purposes, the acetabulum is an effective predictor in the determination of age. This newly proposed method explores the same criteria of ageing as the Lovejoy method. The combination of the two methods produces relatively consistent results in the estimation of age.
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?
The use of acetabulum alterations as skeletal age markers has been questioned because the hip is a joint that experiences changes due to possibly nonage-related stresses such as differential mechanical loading, osteoarthritis, and dysplasia.
“The use of acetabulum alterations as skeletal age markers has been questioned since the hip is a joint that experiences changes because of possibly nonage‐related stresses such as differential mechanical loading, osteoarthritis, and dysplasia [17].”
From Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa (2026) · cites this paper as [17]
The acetabulum has age-related degenerative changes like the pubic symphysis and auricular surface, but it is also resistant to postdepositional degradation.
“The acetabulum has age‐related degenerative changes, just like the pubic symphysis and the auricular surface, but it is also resistant to postdepositional degradation [17].”
From Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa (2026) · cites this paper as [17]
Rissech outlined seven age changes in the acetabulum and concluded that acetabular observations allow for precise age-at-death estimations for individuals over 40 years of age.
“Rissech [17] outlined seven age changes in the acetabulum bone and concluded that acetabular observations allow for precise age‐at‐death estimations for individuals over 40 years of age [17].”
From Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa (2026) · cites this paper as [17]
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
- Rougé-Maillart, C., Telmon, N., Rissech, C., Malgosa, A., & Rougé, D.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of Angers 1 Department of Legal Medicine, , France .
- Medical University of Toulouse 2 Department of Legal Medicine, , France .
- Anthropology Laboratory, Autonomous University of Barcelona 3 , Spain .
- Venue
- Journal of Forensic Sciences
- Publisher
- ASTM International
- Published
- 2004-03-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-7
- ISSN
- 0022-1198
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 0
- 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
