Test of revised method of age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium

Mulhern, Dawn M.; Jones, Erica B.

doi:10.1002/ajpa.10410

Cited by 90 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Spanish sample demonstrates lower levels of bias and absolute error than the Thai sample used by Schmitt [2], the Canadian sample of Saunders et al [4] and the Italian sample of Hens et al [10] for the Lovejoy and Suchey-Brooks methods. It also shows lower bias and absolute error than the U.S. sample of Mulhern and Jones [30] for the Buckberry and Chamberlain method.…”

Section: ) the Applicability Of The Methods To Spanish Skeletal Sammentioning

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparison of three established age estimation methods on an adult Spanish sample

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most current methods for adult skeletal age-at-death estimation are based on American samples comprising individuals of European and African ancestry. Our limited understanding of population variability hampers our efforts to apply these techniques to various skeletal populations around the world, especially in global forensic contexts. Further, documented skeletal samples are rare, limiting our ability to test our techniques. The objective of this paper is to test three pelvic macroscopic methods (1-Suchey-Brooks; 2-Lovejoy; 3-Buckberry and Chamberlain) on a documented modern Spanish sample. These methods were selected because they are popular among Spanish anthropologists and because they never have been tested in a Spanish sample. The study sample consists of 80 individuals (55 ♂ and 25 ♀) of known sex and age from the Valladolid collection. Results indicate that in all three methods, levels of bias and inaccuracy increase with age. The Lovejoy method performs poorly (27%) compared with Suchey-Brooks (71%) and Buckberry and Chamberlain (86%). However, the levels of correlation between phases and chronological ages are low and comparable in the three methods (< 0.395). The apparent accuracy of the Suchey-Brooks and Buckberry and Chamberlain methods is largely based on the broad width of the methods' estimated intervals. This study suggests that before systematic application of these three methodologies in Spanish populations, further statistical modeling and research into the co-variance of chronological age with morphological change is necessary. Future methods should be developed specific to various world populations, and should allow for both precision and flexibility in age estimation. However, the levels of correlation between phases and chronological ages are low and comparable in the three methods (< 0.395). The apparent accuracy of the Suchey-Brooks and Buckberry and Chamberlain methods is largely based on the broad width of the methods' estimated intervals. This study suggests that before systematic application of these three methodologies in Spanish populations, further statistical modeling and research into the co-variance of chronological age with morphological change is necessary. Future methods should be developed specific to various world populations, and should allow for both precision and flexibility in age estimation.3

show abstract

Section: ) the Applicability Of The Methods To Spanish Skeletal Sammentioning

confidence: 76%

“…In this method, each auricular surface feature is analyzed and scored independently and then combined into a composite score related to a broad age range. This method is the most recent of the three, and although some authors have proposed modifications [26,29]; it has rarely been evaluated using documented osteological collections [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of three established age estimation methods on an adult Spanish sample

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unsurprisingly, given the old demography of the Spitalfields reference sample, the vast majority of these studies have found that the Buckberry-Chamberlain method performs better on older individuals (Falys et al 2006;Gocha et al 2015;Hens and Belcastro 2012;Mulhern and Jones 2005;San Millán et al 2013). Indeed, the equal age-at-death distribution used in the study by Mulhern and Jones (2005) presumably will have reduced biases created by the uneven age-at-death distribution in the original paper. The descriptive statistics reported in this study are therefore potentially preferable to those reported in Buckberry and Chamberlain (2002), particularly when calculating inaccuracy and bias.…”

Section: Figure 2 Herementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, when the method has been tested on different populations, bias and inaccuracy, based on the mean ages derived from, and reflecting the structure of, the Spitalfields population are commonly used (Falys et al 2006;Gocha et al 2015;Hens and Belcastro 2012;Moraitis et al 2014;Mulhern and Jones 2005;Rissech et al 2012;San Millán et al 2013). Unsurprisingly, given the old demography of the Spitalfields reference sample, the vast majority of these studies have found that the Buckberry-Chamberlain method performs better on older individuals (Falys et al 2006;Gocha et al 2015;Hens and Belcastro 2012;Mulhern and Jones 2005;San Millán et al 2013). Indeed, the equal age-at-death distribution used in the study by Mulhern and Jones (2005) presumably will have reduced biases created by the uneven age-at-death distribution in the original paper.…”

Section: Figure 2 Herementioning

confidence: 99%

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

Buckberry

2015

Annals of Human Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Adult age-at-death is presented in a number of different ways by anthropologists. Ordinal categories predominate in osteoarchaeology, but do not reflect individual variation in ageing, with too many adults being classified as 'middle adults'. In addition, mean ages (derived from reference samples) are overly-relied upon when developing and testing methods. In both cases, 'age mimicry' is not adequately accounted for.Objectives: To highlight the many inherent biases created when developing, testing and applying age-estimation methods without fully considering the impact of 'age mimicry' and individual variation.Methods: The paper draws on previously published research (Web of Science, Pub Med, Google Scholar) on age estimation methods and their use in anthropology.Results and Conclusions: There is a lack of consistency in the methods used to estimate age, and for the mode of combining them. Ordinal categories are frequently used in osteoarchaeology, whereas forensic anthropologists are more likely to produce case-specific age ranges. Mean ages reflect the age structure of reference samples, and should not be used to estimate age for individuals from populations with a different age-at-death structure. Individual-specific age ranges and/or probability densities should be used to report individual age. Further research should be undertaken on how to create unbiased, combined method age estimates. 2Age estimation of adults remains one of the most complex, yet essential, aspects of human skeletal analysis (Aykroyd et al. 1997;Bocquet-Appel and Masset 1982; Hoppa and Vaupel 2002a;Konigsberg and Frankenberg 1992;Milner et al. 2008). In a society ruled by numbers, we are eager to ascribe a specific age to skeletonised remains, either to facilitate the identification of unidentified remains in a forensic situation, or to better interpret the life, death and burial of archaeological humans. Yet many methods of age estimation, especially for adults but also for non-adults, are woefully inadequate at producing point age estimates. Over the last few decades, research into the development, refinement and testing of adult age-estimation methods has expanded, resulting in a plethora of techniques, and variants of techniques, available for application, with the aim of improving accuracy and precision.Age estimation in non-adults, where dental and skeletal maturation are employed to estimate chronological age, typically produces estimates that are both accurate and precise. Dental development in particular has been shown to be minimally affected by external factors such as disease or malnutrition (Elamin and Liversidge 2013) and thus less variation in age for a specific stage of development. Once skeletal maturity has been reached, age is typically estimated using degenerative changes of the skeleton, dental wear and (less frequently) microscopic analysis of bone and cementum. All of these, except tooth cementum annulations, have only a broad relationship with chronological age (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013;Gro...

show abstract

“…When methods based on, for example, the pubic symphysis [51][52][53][54][55][56] and auricular surface [57][58][59][60][61] are considered, it is clear that their mean errors are also high. It seems that age estimation in adults still remains challenging, and that the Lamendin and modified Lamendin techniques are probably on par with other methods used in adult age estimation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A test of the Lamendin method of age estimation in South African canines

Ackermann

Steyn

2014

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Age estimation in unknown adult skeletons remains a considerable problem in forensic anthropology. In 1992, Lamendin and colleagues published a non-destructive method of age estimation on single rooted teeth. With this method, periodontosis and root transparency are judged against root height, and these are then used in regression formulae to estimate age.The aim of this study was to test the accuracy of the Lamendin method on a large sample of canines of South Africans, and if necessary to adapt the formulae for this population. A sample of known sex, age and population group was used. This included 537 upper and lower canines from 498 skulls, and included black males, black females, white males and white females. The age of the individuals ranged from 20 to 90 years. The original formulae gave relatively poor results, and in an attempt to obtain better accuracy the formulae were adapted with the current data. Even after adaptation of the formulae, the highest correlation between estimated age and actual age remained low (R 2 = 0.41), with mean errors ranging between 12 and 15 years. Periodontosis was better correlated with age than root transparency. The accuracy of the method was found to be much lower than what was originally published, but probably reflects biological reality and is on a par with other methods of adult age estimation.2

show abstract

Test of revised method of age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium

Cited by 90 publications

References 10 publications

A comparison of three established age estimation methods on an adult Spanish sample

A comparison of three established age estimation methods on an adult Spanish sample

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

A test of the Lamendin method of age estimation in South African canines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About