Rib histomorphometry: A reliability and validation study with a critical review of histological techniques for forensic age estimation

Age estimation for two Mediterranean populations: rib histomorphometry applied to forensic identification and bone remodelling research

“…2. Intra-and inter-observer errors have been already reported for the present histological data [12]. Considering both Technical error of measurement (TEM) and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) results, it was demonstrated that overall within and between observer errors fell within the acceptable levels of error, except for N.On.…”

“…This paper is a continuation of previously reported results specific to the validation study performed by testing four existing rib histological methods on Cretan and Greek-Cypriot samples [12]. A systematic underestimation of three of the aging methods with an overall increase in errors as age increases has been demonstrated [2,3,15].…”

“…Some studies have demonstrated that sample demographics and intrinsic sample characteristics do not have an impact on the reliability of the methods, reporting similar accuracy rates for age estimation population-specific methods as for non-related population formulae [10]. Other researchers have shown that the application of histological population-specific methods provides more accurate age estimates as existing methods produced age estimates not falling within the reported error rates [11][12][13]. Thus, exploring the development of populationspecific histological age estimation formulae has been the target of many studies [4,14].…”

The professional practice of forensic anthropology: Contemporary developments and cross‐disciplinary applications

“…Histological age estimations are primarily based in quantifying size ratios between osteons and Haversian canals, for example, measurement of perimeter, diameter or total area, and/or measurement of osteon circularity and population density (also see Garcia-Donas et al, 2020;Streeter, 2012) that are associated with accumulated remodeling activity throughout life (Andronowski & Cole, 2021). Histomorphometric approaches are amenable to statistical quantification of measurement reliability and precision (also see Garcia-Donas et al, 2020;Lagacé et al, 2019) in addition to confidence around associated outputs. Such approaches are likely to meet evidentiary admissibility requirements for consideration by the judiciary (Christensen & Crowder, 2009).…”

“…The potential of quantitative histology for forensic age estimation is evidenced by the number of publications following Kerley that further explored accuracy in different population samples, different bones and structures, for example, Stout and Gehlert (1982), Stout and Paine (1992), Mulhern (2000), Cho et al (2002), Crowder and Dominguez (2012), and see also Streeter (2012), Ubelaker and Khosrowshahi (2019). Recent modifications have been introduced to simplify methods, quantitatively test and improve reliability to quantifying variances relative to remodeling and sampling location, and intra-and interpopulation effects (Crowder et al, 2009;Cummaudo et al, 2018;Dominguez et al, 2020;Garcia-Donas et al, 2020;Lagacé et al, 2019;Milenkovic et al, 2013), and minimizing the invasiveness of bone sampling (e.g., Andronowski et al, 2020;Maat et al, 2006). The most recent research generally follows the same biological rationale identified in the early endeavors, albeit now with improved sensitivity associated with technological improvements, especially micro-CT, high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT, virtual models, and 3D visualization (Hennig et al, 2015;Maggiano et al, 2017;Soltan et al, 2019;and see Andronowski et al, 2018;Andronowski and Cole, 2021; for a comprehensive review of those approaches).…”