The Utility of the Samworth and Gowland Age‐at‐Death “Look‐up” Tables in Forensic Anthropology*

Abstract

Accurate age-at-death estimates are crucial to forensic anthropologists when onstructing biological profiles aimed at narrowing a missing-persons list and to allow for timely and efficient identification of an unknown victim. The present contribution evaluates the utility of three new age-at-death estimation techniques recently proposed by Samworth and Gowland (2007). Results indicate that, in the samples under study, the Samworth and Gowland estimates from the pubic symphysis and auricular surface perform similar to alternate phase methods. The combined method does not appear to further enhance either the precision or the accuracy of the single pubic symphysis age-at-death estimate. In conclusion, these new methods seem to be more robust to distribution deviations than originally proposed by Samworth and Gowland (2007). They are therefore suitable for immediate and reliable forensic usage in the United States and worthy of further research for their use in North American forensic contexts.

A Comparative Assessment of the Chen et al. and Suchey‐Brooks Pubic Aging Methods on a North American Sample, ,

“…publication. As in step 1, AME and bias were calculated for each pubic bone and for both Revised statistical models, which include GRA to demonstrate accuracy .…”

“…Bias and absolute mean error (AME) (also referred to as "inaccuracy") were applied to demonstrate the accuracy of the Chen et al method (1,3,4,(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). AME, or Σ |estimated ageactual age|/N, is the absolute difference between the estimated and actual ages.…”

“…Bias, or Σ (estimated ageactual age)/N, is the difference between the estimated and actual ages. Bias demonstrates the average over-or underaging of the individual's actual age, while AME demonstrates the average error from the individual's actual age (1,3,4,(16)(17)(18)(19)(20).…”

“…The development of the Revised MRA + GRA and QMI + GRA equations required the use of a backward stepwise regression with an F criterion of removal = 0.10 to replicate their complementary equations in the Chen et al publication. As in step 1, AME and bias were calculated for each pubic bone and for both Revised statistical models, which include GRA to demonstrate accuracy (1,3,4,(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). For both the Original and Revised Chen et al models, frequencies of AME were generated.…”

Estimating Age and Sex from the Skeleton, a Paleopathological Perspective

“…Collectively, they can derail the process of making sense of disease patterning in adult skeletons. Conventional adult age-estimation procedures, including those that rely on the pubic symphysis, sacroiliac joint, ribs, and cranial sutures, tend to yield biased results (Murray and Murray 1991;Saunders et al 1992;Aiello and Molleson 1993;Dudar et al 1993;Galera et al 1998;Oettlé and Steyn 2000;Schmitt 2004;Mulhern and Jones 2005;Martrille et al 2007;Hens et al 2008;Passalacqua 2010). Often, the ages of individuals in their twenties are overestimated.…”