Evaluation of age estimation technique: Testing traits of the acetabulum to estimate age at death in adult males

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 56, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 302-311

  Calce, Stephanie E ^a   Rogers, Tracy L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Acetabulum; Adult male; Forensic anthropology; Forensic science; Os coxae; Skeletal age estimation

Indexed keywords

ACETABULUM; ADULT; AGE DETERMINATION; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY; POROSITY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ACETABULUM; ADULT; AGE DETERMINATION BY SKELETON; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGY; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POROSITY; SOFTWARE;

EID: 79951826920     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: 15564029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01700.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Rissech C, Estabrook GF, Cunha E, Malgosa A. Using the acetabulum to estimate age at death of adult males. J Forensic Sci 2006;51(2):213-29.
2. Rougé-Maillart CL, Telmon N, Rissech C, Malgosa A, Rougé D. The determination of male adult age by central and posterior coxal analysis-a preliminary study. J Forensic Sci 2004;49(2):208-14.
3. Rissech C, Sañudo JR, Malagosa A. The acetabular point: a morphological and ontogenic study. J Anat 2001;198(6):743-8.
4. Rissech C, Estabrook GF, Cunha E, Malgosa A. Estimation of age at death for adult males using the acetabulum, applied to four western European populations. J Forensic Sci 2007;52(4):774-8.
5. Buckberry JL, Chamberlain AT. Age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium: a revised method. Am J Phys Anthropol 2002;119(3):231-9.
6. İşcan MY. Age markers in the human skeleton. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1989.
7. Boldsen JL, Milner GR, Konigsberg LW, Wood JW. Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons. In: Hoppa RD, Vaupel JW, editors. Paleodemography: age distributions from skeletal samples. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002;73-106.
8. Bedford ME, Russell KF, Lovejoy CO, Meindl RS, Simpson SW, Stuart-Macadam PL. Test of the multifactorial aging method using skeletons with known ages at death from the Grant collection. Am J Phys Anthropol 1993;91(3):281-97.
9. Murray KA, Murray T. A test of the auricular surface aging technique. J Forensic Sci 1991;6(4):1162-9.
10. Falys CG, Schutkowski H, Weston DA. Auricular surface aging: worse than expected? A test of the revised method on a documented historic skeletal assemblage. Am J Phys Anthropol 2006;130(4):508-13.
11. Berg GE. Pubic bone age estimation in adult women. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(3):569-77.
12. Saunders SR, Fitzgerald C, Rogers T, Dudar C, McKillop H. A test of several methods of skeletal age estimation using a documented archaeological sample. Canadian Soc Foren Sci 1992;25(2):97-118.
13. Schmitt A, Murail P, Cunha E, Rougé D. Variability of the pattern of aging on the human skeleton: evidence from bone indicators and implications on age at death estimation. J Forensic Sci 2002;47(6):1203-9.
14. Kimmerle EH, Konigsberg LW, Jantz RL, Baraybar JP. Analysis of age at death estimation through the use of pubic symphyseal data. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(3):558-68.
15. Hens SM, Rastelli E, Belcastro G. Age estimation from the human os coxa: a test on a documented Italian collection. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(5):1040-3.
16. Konigsberg LW, Herrmann NP, Wescott DJ, Kimmerle EH. Estimation and evidence in forensic anthropology: age at death. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(3):541-57.
17. White TD, Folkens PA. Human osteology, 2nd edn. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 2000;340-61.
18. Lucy D, Aykroyd RG, Pollard AM, Solheim T. A Bayesian approach to adult human age estimation from dental observations by Johanson's age changes. J Forensic Sci 1996;41(2):189-94.
19. Prince DA, Kimmerle EH, Konigsberg LW. A Bayesian approach to estimate skeletal age at death utilizing dental wear. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(3):588-93.
20. Haglund WD. Dogs and coyotes: postmortem involvement with human remains. In: Haglund WD, Sorg MH, editors. Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC, 1997;367-81.
21. Komar DA, Potter WE. Percentage of body recovered and its effect on identification rates and cause and manner of death determination. J Forensic Sci 2007;52(3):528-31.
22. Komar DA. Twenty-seven years of forensic anthropology casework in New Mexico. J Forensic Sci 2003;48(3):521-4.
23. Laurent M. Comparison of four skeletal methods for the estimation of age at death on white and black adults. J Forensic Sci 2007;52(2):302-7.
24. Suchey JM, Katz D. Applications of pubic age determination in a forensic setting. In: Reichs KJ, editor. Forensic osteology: advances in the identification of human remains, 2nd edn. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1998;204-36.
25. Christensen AM. The impact of Daubert: implications for testimony and research in forensic anthropology (and the use of frontal sinuses in personal identification). J Forensic Sci 2004;49(3):427-30.
26. Federal Rules of Evidence (1975; 2000).
27. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
28. Ousley SD, Jantz RL. FORDISC 3.0: Personal Computer Forensic Discriminant Functions, 3.0 ed. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee, 2005.