• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Technical note: The effect of midshaft location on the error ranges of femoral and tibial cross-sectional parameters

V. Sládek, M. Berner, P. Galeta, L. Friedl, S. Kudrnová

. 2010 ; 141 (2) : 325-332.

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, historické články, časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc12025463

In comparing long-bone cross-sectional geometric properties between individuals, percentages of bone length are often used to identify equivalent locations along the diaphysis. In fragmentary specimens where bone lengths cannot be measured, however, these locations must be estimated more indirectly. In this study, we examine the effect of inaccurately located femoral and tibial midshafts on estimation of geometric properties. The error ranges were compared on 30 femora and tibiae from the Eneolithic and Bronze Age. Cross-sections were obtained at each 1% interval from 60 to 40% of length using CT scans. Five percent of deviation from midshaft properties was used as the maximum acceptable error. Reliability was expressed by mean percentage differences, standard deviation of percentage differences, mean percentage absolute differences, limits of agreement, and mean accuracy range (MAR) (range within which mean deviation from true midshaft values was less than 5%). On average, tibial cortical area and femoral second moments of area are the least sensitive to positioning error, with mean accuracy ranges wide enough for practical application in fragmentary specimens (MAR = 40-130 mm). In contrast, tibial second moments of area are the most sensitive to error in midshaft location (MAR = 14-20 mm). Individuals present significant variation in morphology and thus in error ranges for different properties. For highly damaged fossil femora and tibiae we recommend carrying out additional tests to better establish specific errors associated with uncertain length estimates.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc12025463
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20130302164835.0
007      
ta
008      
120816s2010 xxu f 000 0#eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1002/ajpa.21153 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)19919000
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Sládek, Vladimír, $d 1969- $7 mzk2003187360 $u Department of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic. sladekv@yahoo.fr
245    10
$a Technical note: The effect of midshaft location on the error ranges of femoral and tibial cross-sectional parameters / $c V. Sládek, M. Berner, P. Galeta, L. Friedl, S. Kudrnová
520    9_
$a In comparing long-bone cross-sectional geometric properties between individuals, percentages of bone length are often used to identify equivalent locations along the diaphysis. In fragmentary specimens where bone lengths cannot be measured, however, these locations must be estimated more indirectly. In this study, we examine the effect of inaccurately located femoral and tibial midshafts on estimation of geometric properties. The error ranges were compared on 30 femora and tibiae from the Eneolithic and Bronze Age. Cross-sections were obtained at each 1% interval from 60 to 40% of length using CT scans. Five percent of deviation from midshaft properties was used as the maximum acceptable error. Reliability was expressed by mean percentage differences, standard deviation of percentage differences, mean percentage absolute differences, limits of agreement, and mean accuracy range (MAR) (range within which mean deviation from true midshaft values was less than 5%). On average, tibial cortical area and femoral second moments of area are the least sensitive to positioning error, with mean accuracy ranges wide enough for practical application in fragmentary specimens (MAR = 40-130 mm). In contrast, tibial second moments of area are the most sensitive to error in midshaft location (MAR = 14-20 mm). Individuals present significant variation in morphology and thus in error ranges for different properties. For highly damaged fossil femora and tibiae we recommend carrying out additional tests to better establish specific errors associated with uncertain length estimates.
650    _2
$a anatomie průřezová $x metody $7 D019412
650    _2
$a antropologie fyzická $x metody $7 D000885
650    _2
$a antropometrie $x metody $7 D000886
650    _2
$a femur $x anatomie a histologie $7 D005269
650    _2
$a zkameněliny $7 D005580
650    _2
$a dějiny starověku $7 D049690
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
650    _2
$a výzkumný projekt $7 D012107
650    _2
$a tibie $x anatomie a histologie $7 D013977
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a historické články $7 D016456
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Berner, Margit $u Department of Anthropology, Natural History Museum, Vienna, Austria
700    1_
$a Galeta, Patrik, $d 1974- $7 mzk2003187362
700    1#
$a Friedl, Lukáš. $7 _AN071562
700    1#
$a Kudrnová, Šárka. $7 _AN071563
773    0_
$w MED00000282 $t American journal of physical anthropology $x 1096-8644 $g Roč. 141, č. 2 (2010), s. 325-332
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19919000 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y m
990    __
$a 20120816 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20130302165046 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 947505 $s 782809
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2010 $b 141 $c 2 $d 325-332 $i 1096-8644 $m American journal of physical anthropology $n Am J Phys Anthropol $x MED00000282
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20120816/10/02

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

    Možnosti archivace