2009/04/17 by Heli Maijanen
Arts and Humanities · Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology · Medicine · #Autopsy Techniques and Outcomes #Dermatoglyphics and Human Traits #Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
paper · doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01053.x
openalex publication_date 2009/04/17 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
This study compared eight versions of the anatomical method for stature estimation on a white male sample (n = 34) from the W. M. Bass Donated Skeletal Collection. The aim was to evaluate errors in the estimates and to discuss how useful the methods are in forensic context. The average error estimating living stature was less than 1 cm for six of the methods. The correlations between the estimates were high (r = 0.982-0.999). In practice, differences between the versions as well as those between long bone-based equations and anatomical methods were small. Anatomical method is nevertheless more accurate than long bone regressions when individuals with atypical body proportions are examined.