Skeletal Age Changes in Young American Males Analysed From the Standpoint of Age Identification

McKern, Thomas W.; Stewart, T. D.

doi:10.21236/ad0147240

Cited by 240 publications

(229 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

203

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The studies of McKern and Stewart, [24] Schaefer and Black [10] and O'Connor et al [14] are the most similar in methodology to our study, and our results were com- pared with theirs. These studies were conducted in United States, Bosnia and Ireland respectively.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radiological assessment of age from epiphyseal fusion at the knee joint

Ebeye¹,

Eboh²,

Onyia³

2016

Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Age determination is needed in administration of justice, employment, marriage, forensic investigation and identification. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the relationship between stages of epiphyseal union at the knee joint and chronological age. Methods:Anterior posterior and lateral knee radiographs of 100 males and 110 females aged 9-19 years were examined. Epiphyseal union was divided into five specific stages in the femur, tibia and fibula. Fusion was scored as stage 0: non-union, stage 1: beginning union, stage 2: active union, stage 3: recent union, and stage 4: complete union. Results:Mean age gradually increased with each stage of union and varied between males and females. A statistically significant difference in mean age was recorded between stages for the three epiphyses. Epiphyseal union occurred earlier in females than in males. A statistically significant difference was observed between the mean age of union for males and females for stages 1 and 2 for the femur, and stages 0, 1, 2 and 3 for the tibia and fibula. Conclusion:The results of this study indicate that radiographic analysis of the knee is a valuable alternative for estimation of chronological age.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The results of previous studies from Britain, America, Australia, India and our study in Nigeria are shown in Table 4. [10,14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] …”

Section: Stage 3 -Recent Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiological assessment of age from epiphyseal fusion at the knee joint

Ebeye¹,

Eboh²,

Onyia³

2016

Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anthropologists routinely suggest using more than one indicator to estimate age in adults, as using more indicators usually yields a more accurate estimate (McKern and Stewart, 1957;Boldsen et al, 2002;Buckberry and Chamberlain, 2002;Uhl and Nawrocki, 2010). However, longitudinal growth studies and recent anthropological studies have only provided univariate assessments with no attempt to evaluate a multivariate approach for subadult age estimation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using multivariate adaptive regression splines to estimate subadult age from diaphyseal dimensions

Stull

L'Abbé

Ousley

2014

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subadult age estimation is considered the most accurate parameter estimated in a subadult biological profile, even though the methods are deficient and the samples from which they are based are inappropriate. The current study addresses the problems that plague subadult age estimation and creates age estimation models from diaphyseal dimensions of modern children.The sample included 1,310 males and females between the ages of birth and 12 years.Eighteen diaphyseal length and breadth measurements were obtained from Lodox Statscan radiographic images generated at two institutions in Cape Town, South Africa between 2007 and 2012. Univariate and multivariate age estimation models were created using multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS). K-fold cross-validated 95% prediction intervals (PIs) were created for each model and the precision of each model was assessed.

show abstract

“…The minimum number of individuals was determined from the maximum number of any one bone with left and right sides recorded separately. Adult age was estimated according to established anthropological standards such are dental eruption in mandible (Brothwell 1981), suture closure of cranium (Meindl and Lovejoy 1985), epiphyseal union of long bones (McKern and Stewart 1957), and changes on the sternal end of rib (l §can et al 1984,1985). For children dental eruption and diaphyseal length of long bones were used to approximate age at death (Moorrees 1957;Ubelaker 1978).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%