在估计美国白人男性的身高方面,Trotter和Gleser(1958)的方程优于Trotter和Gleser(1952)的方程。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, LEGAL Forensic Sciences Research Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1093/fsr/owad008
Yangseung Jeong, Rebecca J Taylor, Yochun Jung, Eun Jin Woo
{"title":"在估计美国白人男性的身高方面,Trotter和Gleser(1958)的方程优于Trotter和Gleser(1952)的方程。","authors":"Yangseung Jeong,&nbsp;Rebecca J Taylor,&nbsp;Yochun Jung,&nbsp;Eun Jin Woo","doi":"10.1093/fsr/owad008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Trotter and Gleser presented two sets of stature estimation equations for the US White males in their 1952 and 1958 studies. Following Trotter's suggestion favouring the 1952 equations simply due to the smaller standard errors, the 1958 equations have been seldom used and have gone without additional systematic validation tests. This study aims to assess the performance of the Trotter and Gleser 1952, Trotter and Gleser 1958, and FORDISC equations for the White males in a quantitative and systematic way, particularly when applied to the WWII and Korean War casualties. In sum, 27 equations (7 from the 1952 study, 10 from the 1958 study, and 10 from FORDISC) were applied to the osteometric data of 240 accounted-for White male casualties of the WWII and Korean War. Then, the bias, accuracy, and Bayes factor for each set of stature estimates were calculated. The results show that, overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 equations outperform the 1952 and FORDISC equations in terms of all three measures. Particularly, the equations with higher Bayes factors produced stature estimates where distributions were closer to that of the reported statures than those with lower Bayes factors. When considering Bayes factors, the best performing equation was the \"Radius\" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 15.34) followed by the \"Humerus+Radius\" equation from FORDISC (BF = 14.42) and the \"Fibula\" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 13.82). The results of this study will provide researchers and practitioners applying the Trotter and Gleser stature estimation method with a practical guide for equation selection.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>The performance of three stature estimation methods was compared quantitatively.Trotter and Gleser's (1952, 1958) and FORDISC White male equations were included.Overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 method outperformed the other methods.This study provides a practical guide for stature estimation equation selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":45852,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Sciences Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"16-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trotter and Gleser's (1958) equations outperform Trotter and Gleser's (1952) equations in stature estimation of the US White males.\",\"authors\":\"Yangseung Jeong,&nbsp;Rebecca J Taylor,&nbsp;Yochun Jung,&nbsp;Eun Jin Woo\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/fsr/owad008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Trotter and Gleser presented two sets of stature estimation equations for the US White males in their 1952 and 1958 studies. Following Trotter's suggestion favouring the 1952 equations simply due to the smaller standard errors, the 1958 equations have been seldom used and have gone without additional systematic validation tests. This study aims to assess the performance of the Trotter and Gleser 1952, Trotter and Gleser 1958, and FORDISC equations for the White males in a quantitative and systematic way, particularly when applied to the WWII and Korean War casualties. In sum, 27 equations (7 from the 1952 study, 10 from the 1958 study, and 10 from FORDISC) were applied to the osteometric data of 240 accounted-for White male casualties of the WWII and Korean War. Then, the bias, accuracy, and Bayes factor for each set of stature estimates were calculated. The results show that, overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 equations outperform the 1952 and FORDISC equations in terms of all three measures. Particularly, the equations with higher Bayes factors produced stature estimates where distributions were closer to that of the reported statures than those with lower Bayes factors. When considering Bayes factors, the best performing equation was the \\\"Radius\\\" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 15.34) followed by the \\\"Humerus+Radius\\\" equation from FORDISC (BF = 14.42) and the \\\"Fibula\\\" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 13.82). The results of this study will provide researchers and practitioners applying the Trotter and Gleser stature estimation method with a practical guide for equation selection.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>The performance of three stature estimation methods was compared quantitatively.Trotter and Gleser's (1952, 1958) and FORDISC White male equations were included.Overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 method outperformed the other methods.This study provides a practical guide for stature estimation equation selection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Sciences Research\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"16-23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Sciences Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/fsr/owad008\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Sciences Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fsr/owad008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在1952年和1958年的研究中,Trotter和Gleser提出了两组美国白人男性的身高估计方程。根据Trotter的建议,1952年的方程仅仅是由于较小的标准误差,1958年的方程很少使用,并且没有额外的系统验证测试。本研究旨在以定量和系统的方式评估Trotter and Gleser 1952、Trotter and Gleser 1958以及白人男性的FORDISC方程的表现,特别是在应用于第二次世界大战和朝鲜战争伤亡时。总的来说,27个方程(7个来自1952年的研究,10个来自1958年的研究,10个来自FORDISC)被应用于240名二战和朝鲜战争中白人男性伤亡的骨测量数据。然后,计算每组身高估计值的偏差、精度和贝叶斯因子。结果表明,总体而言,Trotter和Gleser的1958方程在所有三个度量方面都优于1952和FORDISC方程。特别是,具有较高贝叶斯因子的方程产生的身高估计分布比具有较低贝叶斯因子的方程更接近报告的身高分布。在考虑贝叶斯因素时,表现最好的方程是1958年研究中的“桡骨”方程(BF = 15.34),其次是FORDISC研究中的“肱骨+桡骨”方程(BF = 14.42)和1958年研究中的“腓骨”方程(BF = 13.82)。本研究结果将为Trotter和Gleser身高估计方法的研究人员和实践者提供实用的公式选择指南。重点:对三种高度估计方法的性能进行了定量比较。包括Trotter和Gleser的(1952,1958)和FORDISC白人男性方程。总的来说,Trotter和Gleser 1958年的方法优于其他方法。该研究为身高估算方程的选择提供了实用的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Trotter and Gleser's (1958) equations outperform Trotter and Gleser's (1952) equations in stature estimation of the US White males.

Trotter and Gleser presented two sets of stature estimation equations for the US White males in their 1952 and 1958 studies. Following Trotter's suggestion favouring the 1952 equations simply due to the smaller standard errors, the 1958 equations have been seldom used and have gone without additional systematic validation tests. This study aims to assess the performance of the Trotter and Gleser 1952, Trotter and Gleser 1958, and FORDISC equations for the White males in a quantitative and systematic way, particularly when applied to the WWII and Korean War casualties. In sum, 27 equations (7 from the 1952 study, 10 from the 1958 study, and 10 from FORDISC) were applied to the osteometric data of 240 accounted-for White male casualties of the WWII and Korean War. Then, the bias, accuracy, and Bayes factor for each set of stature estimates were calculated. The results show that, overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 equations outperform the 1952 and FORDISC equations in terms of all three measures. Particularly, the equations with higher Bayes factors produced stature estimates where distributions were closer to that of the reported statures than those with lower Bayes factors. When considering Bayes factors, the best performing equation was the "Radius" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 15.34) followed by the "Humerus+Radius" equation from FORDISC (BF = 14.42) and the "Fibula" equation from the 1958 study (BF = 13.82). The results of this study will provide researchers and practitioners applying the Trotter and Gleser stature estimation method with a practical guide for equation selection.

Key points: The performance of three stature estimation methods was compared quantitatively.Trotter and Gleser's (1952, 1958) and FORDISC White male equations were included.Overall, Trotter and Gleser's 1958 method outperformed the other methods.This study provides a practical guide for stature estimation equation selection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic Sciences Research
Forensic Sciences Research MEDICINE, LEGAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Forensic efficiency and population genetic construction of Guizhou Gelao minority from Southwest China revealed by a panel of 23 autosomal STR loci. Correction to: Metric analysis of the patella for sex estimation in a Portuguese sample. Correction to: Forensic features and phylogenetic structure survey of four populations from southwest China via the autosomal insertion/deletion markers. Correction to: Potential role of the sella turcica X-ray imaging aspects for sex estimation in the field of forensic anthropology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Forensic identification in a multidisciplinary perspective focusing on big challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1