TY - JOUR
T1 - Femoral histomorphometric age-at-death studies: The issue of sample size and standard error
AU - Maggio, Ariane
AU - Franklin, Daniel
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - Extant histomorphometric aging methods based on the analysis of the femoral cortex generally report small samples
(N<100) and highly variable standard error of the estimate (SEE) values (1.51–16.98 years). The present paper reviews
the published literature on femoral histomorphometry for age-at-death estimation in order to examine the relationship
between sample size and SEE values, and makes recommendations for minimum reporting requirements for age-at-death
studies based on statistical data. The SEE from a total of 33 studies are analysed. Sample size and confidence intervals are
explored using Hennig and Cooper’s simulation modelling. Analysis of effect size through a fixed-effect model is
performed on 5/33 studies to examine the relationship between sample size and effect size. The pooled sex formulae
from Nor et al., Martrille et al. and Thompson and the two sex-specific formulae of Pfeiffer are examined, as they report
mean and standard deviation values for both chronological and estimated ages. The results of these analyses support
sampling theory, specifically wide variation in SEE when N<100, narrowing as the sample size increases, and lower effect
sizes in the larger of the five studies examined. The findings provide some support for a minimum threshold of 100–
150 individuals for histomorphometric age-at-death estimation. Analysis of effect size is suggested for future investigation in meta-analyses of forensic anthropological age-estimation studies. To ensure increased precision and meaningful
comparison, large samples should be used for histomorphometry, and authors should report SEE and discrete statistics
(e.g. n, mean, standard deviation) for both chronological age and estimated age.
AB - Extant histomorphometric aging methods based on the analysis of the femoral cortex generally report small samples
(N<100) and highly variable standard error of the estimate (SEE) values (1.51–16.98 years). The present paper reviews
the published literature on femoral histomorphometry for age-at-death estimation in order to examine the relationship
between sample size and SEE values, and makes recommendations for minimum reporting requirements for age-at-death
studies based on statistical data. The SEE from a total of 33 studies are analysed. Sample size and confidence intervals are
explored using Hennig and Cooper’s simulation modelling. Analysis of effect size through a fixed-effect model is
performed on 5/33 studies to examine the relationship between sample size and effect size. The pooled sex formulae
from Nor et al., Martrille et al. and Thompson and the two sex-specific formulae of Pfeiffer are examined, as they report
mean and standard deviation values for both chronological and estimated ages. The results of these analyses support
sampling theory, specifically wide variation in SEE when N<100, narrowing as the sample size increases, and lower effect
sizes in the larger of the five studies examined. The findings provide some support for a minimum threshold of 100–
150 individuals for histomorphometric age-at-death estimation. Analysis of effect size is suggested for future investigation in meta-analyses of forensic anthropological age-estimation studies. To ensure increased precision and meaningful
comparison, large samples should be used for histomorphometry, and authors should report SEE and discrete statistics
(e.g. n, mean, standard deviation) for both chronological age and estimated age.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp= 85089172817&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0025802420945939
DO - 10.1177/0025802420945939
M3 - Article
C2 - 32757743
SN - 0025-8024
VL - 60
SP - 257
EP - 265
JO - Medicine, Science and the Law
JF - Medicine, Science and the Law
IS - 4
ER -