Assessment of Craniometric Sexual Dimorphism Using Multidetector Computed Tomographic Imaging in a Sample of Egyptian Population

Abstract

Sex determination is an initial and essential component of any medicolegal investigations. However, sometimes only cranial remains are available. The objective of this study was to determine sex using 12 craniofacial measurements in multidetector computed tomographic images of 150 Egyptian subjects (80 men and 70 women), with age ranging from 18 to 60 years. The results revealed a significant increase in the mean of all craniofacial measurements in men in comparison with women (P < 0.05). Bizygomatic breadth was the single most discriminant dimorphic parameter with an accuracy of 74%. Multiple discriminant functional analysis for sex prediction showed increased accuracy to 78.7% in all cases. Using multiple stepwise discriminants, functional analysis showed that the most predictive variables selected were maximal cranial breadth, minimal frontal breadth, bizygomatic breadth, orbital height, bimastoidale, and basion-prosthion length, which showed an accuracy of 80%. On the basis of this study, it is concluded that the cranial measurements obtained from multidetector computed tomographic images could be useful for forensic sex determination in Egyptians, especially in cases of skeletal remains.

Differences in anthropometric measures of the orbit between Serbian and Roma populations of the Central Serbia

“…The observed parameters of the orbital height and width had a tendency to be higher on the right side, leading to the higher values of the left orbital index (right: 88.2 ± 6.7, left: 90.5 ± 6.3; p = 0.019, t-test). This is in accordance with the earlier findings and widely accepted theory that the scull and the face right/left asymmetry with higher values of the right orbital measures are the consequence of the brain asymmetry and the dominance of the left hemisphere [24,25].…”

“…Thus, it is possible to speculate that the lack of sexual dimorphism in Roma population influenced our results. The results of our study confirmed the earlier findings in variation of orbital dimensions between the left and right side [18,24]. The observed parameters of the orbital height and width had a tendency to be higher on the right side, leading to the higher values of the left orbital index (right: 88.2 ± 6.7, left: 90.5 ± 6.3; p = 0.019, t-test).…”

“…The orbital index is one of the parameters used in many anthropological studies, because it depends on the shape of the face and varies among the races, regions within the same race, and ethnic groups [19]. According to the values of orbital indices (right 86.5 ± 7.2 and left 90.2 ± 6.8), we could conclude that the right orbits in Serbs could be placed in mesoseme category, typical for the European and Caucasian race [24], whereas the left orbits are megaseme. Similar to the data from the Polish population [26], Serbian females had higher orbital indices (right: 90.02 and left: 91.09), which could be classified as megaseme, in comparison to the orbital indices of Serbian males.…”

3-D cephalometry of the the orbit regarding endocrine orbitopathy, exophthalmos, and sex

“…Literature Literature Literature Orbit Volume (cm 3 ) 24.3 [43] � 25.6 [62] � 26.8 [63] 25-28.9 [13,[45][46][47] 27.7 [64] 33.2 [65] 26.8 [49] 27.8 [66] 29.6 [50] 29.2 [64] 23.2 [51] 26.5 [49] 25.6 [66] 25.9 [64] Orbit width 39.7 [67] � 39.8 [52] -41.3 [53] 41.7 [64] 35 [68] 39.8 [54] 41 [69] 42.5 [64] 44.2 [55] 33.6 [68] 36.9 [54] 39 [69] 41 [64] 42.1 [54] Orbit height 2 (Inf-SupM) 33.4 [52] 34.1 [64] 36.2 [67] � 36.6 [45] 32.4 [10] 33.6 [64] 35.9 [56] 36.6 [68] 39 [69] 31.8 [10] 34.1 [64] 35.4 [56] 35.7 [68] 37 [69] Orbit lenght medial 41.3 [61] � [64] 43 [57] 46.9…”

SexEst: An open access web application for metric skeletal sex estimation

“…These accuracies are in agreement with previous research conducted on geographically narrower assemblages, adopting population‐specific equations. For example, the combination of multiple cranial measurements reached an accuracy of 77%–80% in South Africans (Franklin et al, 2005), 80% in Egyptians (Adel et al, 2019), 82% in Brazilians (Matamala et al, 2009), 84% in Japanese (İşcan et al, 1995), 85.5%–85.7% in Indians (Ramamoorthy et al, 2016; Saini et al, 2011), 86% in South African Whites (Steyn & İşcan, 1998), 87% in Turks (Ekizoglu et al, 2016), 88.2% in Greeks (Kranioti et al, 2008), 90% in Tunisians (Zaafrane et al, 2018), and 90.6% in Thais (Mahakkanukrauh et al, 2015). Regarding postcranial data, humeral measurements showed accuracies up to 86.8% in Chinese, 92.4% in Japanese, and 97.1% in Thai groups (İşcan et al, 1998), as well as 96% in South African Whites and 95% in South African Blacks (Steyn & İşcan, 1999) and 92.9% in Greeks (Kranioti & Michalodimitrakis, 2009).…”