Forensic anthropology has developed classification techniques for sex estimation of unknown skeletal remains, for example population-specific discriminant function analyses. These methods were designed for populations that lived mostly in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Their level of reliability or misclassification is important for practical use in today's forensic practice; it is, however, unknown. We addressed the question of what the likelihood of errors would be if population specificity of discriminant functions of the tibia were disregarded. Moreover, five classification functions in a Czech sample were proposed (accuracies 82.1-87.5 %, sex bias ranged from -1.3 to -5.4 %). We measured ten variables traditionally used for sex assessment of the tibia on a sample of 30 male and 26 female models from recent Czech population. To estimate the classification accuracy and error (misclassification) rates ignoring population specificity, we selected published classification functions of tibia for the Portuguese, south European, and the North American populations. These functions were applied on the dimensions of the Czech population. Comparing the classification success of the reference and the tested Czech sample showed that females from Czech population were significantly overestimated and mostly misclassified as males. Overall accuracy of sex assessment significantly decreased (53.6-69.7 %), sex bias -29.4-100 %, which is most probably caused by secular trend and the generally high variability of body size. Results indicate that the discriminant functions, developed for skeletal series representing geographically and chronologically diverse populations, are not applicable in current forensic investigations. Finally, implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Department of Anthropology and Human Genetics Faculty of Science Charles University Prague Viničná 7 Praha 2 128 43 Prague Czech Republic

Department of Computer Science Faculty of Electrical Engineering Czech Technical University Prague Karlovo náměstí 13 121 35 Prague 2 Czech Republic

Department of Prehistory Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Science Letenská 4 118 01 Praha Czech Republic

Department of Software and Computer Science Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University Prague Malostranské nám 25 118 00 Prague Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2012 Mar 10;216(1-3):199.e1-7 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2015 Oct;255 :2-8 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2013 Jun 10;229(1-3):158.e1-8 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2015 Jan;60(1):29-40 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 May;136(1):39-50 PubMed

Neural Netw. 2010 May;23(4):568-82 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 1998 Nov 30;98(1-2):9-16 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2012 Jul;126(4):549-58 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2015 Jan;60 Suppl 1:S32-8 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2010 Feb 25;195(1-3):148-52 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2013 Mar 10;226(1-3):302.e1-4 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1999 Sep;110(1):57-67 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2007 Nov;121(6):507-10 PubMed

J Anthropol Sci. 2008;86:91-112 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2012 Apr 10;217(1-3):230.e1-5 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2014 May;238:133-40 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2008 Jan 30;174(2-3):152-6 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 2012 Aug;148(4):601-17 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2016 May;262:284.e1-6 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2000 Feb 28;108(3):165-72 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2013 Nov;58(6):1413-9 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2013 Sep;127(5):1039-44 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2014 Sep;242:300.e1-300.e8 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2016 Feb;259:59-68 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2014 Dec;245:204.e1-8 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2008 Jan;53(1):21-8 PubMed

Sci Justice. 2015 Dec;55(6):377-82 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2004 Nov;49(6):1165-70 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2015 Mar;129(2):373-83 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 1994 May;39(3):785-92 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2015 Mar;129(2):357-63 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 1995 Sep;40(5):762-7 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2014 Jan;234:181.e1-15 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2008 Jul;53(4):771-6 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2015 Mar;129(2):365-72 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 1992 Sep;56(1):29-36 PubMed

Homo. 2007;58(1):75-89 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2009 Oct 30;191(1-3):113.e1-5 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2015 May;129(3):651-9 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2008 Nov;53(6):1283-8 PubMed

J Anthropol Sci. 2015 Jul 20;93:157-62 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2005 Jan 29;147(2-3):147-52 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 1984 Oct;29(4):1087-93 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 1997 Nov 10;90(1-2):111-9 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2001 Jul;46(4):784-7 PubMed

Homo. 2010 Feb;61(1):16-32 PubMed

Leg Med (Tokyo). 2014 Sep;16(5):264-73 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1991 Jun;85(2):221-7 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2011 Mar 20;206(1-3):212.e1-5 PubMed

Skull Base. 2001 Feb;11(1):5-11 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1963 Mar;21:53-68 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2015 Dec;257:515.e1-8 PubMed

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1984 May;64(1):53-7 PubMed

J Forensic Sci. 2015 Sep;60(5):1295-9 PubMed

Int J Legal Med. 2007 Nov;121(6):477-82 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2007 Jan 17;165(2-3):185-93 PubMed

Forensic Sci Int. 2011 Mar 20;206(1-3):214.e1-5 PubMed

Classification performance of the Sella-Tunis et al. (2017) sex estimation method in Czech population: different posterior probability threshold approaches

Prioritizing a high posterior probability threshold leading to low error rate over high classification accuracy: the validity of MorphoPASSE software for cranial morphological sex estimation in a contemporary population

The influence of biological relatedness on sexual dimorphism and sex classification based on external morphology of the frontal bone

Age-related differences in cranial sexual dimorphism in contemporary Europe

Sex estimation using external morphology of the frontal bone and frontal sinuses in a contemporary Czech population