Suppr超能文献

测量胫骨:重温特罗特的错误。

Measuring the Tibia: Trotter's Error Revisited.

机构信息

Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee-Knoxville, 505 Strong Hall, Knoxville, TN, 37996.

出版信息

J Forensic Sci. 2020 Nov;65(6):2094-2097. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14550. Epub 2020 Aug 25.

Abstract

In Trotter and Gleser's (Am J Phys Anthropol 1952;10:463) classic study of stature estimation, a definition of the tibia length measurement is given that agrees with the standard condylar-malleolar length. That Trotter did not in fact measure according to her definition, but rather omitted the malleolus, has been well documented by Jantz et al. (J Forensic Sci 1995;40:758). Both the Terry collection and the World War 2 (WW2) samples were affected, although questions remain about the latter that cannot be resolved directly because it is no longer available for examination. Trotter's data from hundreds of servicemen are especially important because the statures were measured by technicians, rather than based on cadaver lengths or forensic statures. The questions examined in this note are as follows: Was WW2 measured uniformly in the same way as Terry; are there differences between Terry and WW2 that could influence estimation of the adjustment; and is the 10 millimeter (mm) adjustment proposed by Jantz et al. (J Forensic Sci 1995;40:758) still appropriate. Our analysis relies on a measurement taken by Trotter that is clearly and uniquely defined, what she called "ordinary length". This measurement was used to create expectations about how Trotter measured what she called maximum length of the tibia. Results provide no evidence that WW2 was measured any differently than Terry, with the exception of one small series. They also show slight morphological differences on the distal and/or proximal end of the tibia between Terry and WW2. Despite the slight difference, the adjustment to account for the malleolus is still valid.

摘要

在特罗特和格莱泽(Am J Phys Anthropol 1952;10:463)关于身高估计的经典研究中,给出了胫骨长度测量的定义,该定义与标准的髁-踝长度一致。詹茨等人(J Forensic Sci 1995;40:758)已经很好地证明了特罗特实际上并没有按照她的定义进行测量,而是省略了外踝。特里收藏和二战(WW2)样本都受到了影响,尽管关于后者仍存在一些无法直接解决的问题,因为它不再可供检查。特罗特从数百名军人那里收集的数据尤为重要,因为这些身高是由技术人员测量的,而不是基于尸体长度或法医身高。本注释中检查的问题如下:WW2 是否以与特里相同的方式均匀测量;特里和 WW2 之间是否存在差异,这可能会影响调整的估计;以及詹茨等人(J Forensic Sci 1995;40:758)提出的 10 毫米(mm)调整是否仍然适用。我们的分析依赖于特罗特明确而独特定义的测量值,她称之为“普通长度”。该测量值用于创建关于特罗特如何测量她所谓的胫骨最大长度的预期。结果没有证据表明 WW2 的测量方式与特里有任何不同,除了一个小系列。它们还显示了特里和 WW2 之间胫骨远端和/或近端的形态学差异。尽管存在细微差异,但考虑到外踝的调整仍然有效。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验