Infracranial radiographic comparison for human identification: A study of image quality and tissue shielding effects

Te Wai Pounamu T. Hona · John E. Byrd · Carl N. Stephan

6 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Forensic Sciences

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies Dental Radiography and Imaging Autopsy Techniques and Outcomes

Abstract

In this study, we explore how image resolution and tissue shielding can impact correct classification rates (CCRs) of infracranial radiographic comparisons undertaken using small field-of-view radiographs. Thirty-six identification arrays (using clavicles and seventh cervical vertebra) were constructed with each array comprised of five radiographs: one X-ray of a single dry bone (postmortem [PM] skeletal image) and four simulated antemortem [AM] radiographs (radiographs taken pre-skeletization). One AM radiograph in each array represented the ground truth match to the PM radiograph (=25% rate of randomly selecting the correct match). Radiographs were digitally manipulated, so that four varieties of decreasing blur (Gaussian blur = 12-0 pr across 24 arrays), and, for PM clavicles, four varieties of decreasing hard tissue shielding (opacity of 40-0% across 12 arrays) existed. Arrays were evaluated, for their correct PM/AM pair, by 8 anthropologists trained in chest radiograph comparison (CXR; either currently or formerly competency certified by the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency CXR training program), 28 current American Board of Forensic Anthropology (ABFA) diplomates and 30 novices. Analysts' CCRs substantially improved when Gaussian blur was <10 pr (55% CCR at >10 pr vs. 89% for <10 pr). Tissue shielding effects increased CCRs on average by +10% for each -10% opacity step (between 40-0% opacity). The CXR anthropologists were the most tolerant of the more challenging identification contexts (highest blur and opacity), reconfirming that analyst training and expertise is an important factor, especially when poorer quality radiographic images are the subject of analysis.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

References

2002Hard Evidence: Case Studies in Forensic Anthropology 1927IDENTIFICATION BY COMPARISON OF ROENTGENOGRAMS 2002Skeletal Identification Using the Frontal Sinus Region: A Retrospective Study of 39 Cases 1943A NOTE ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF SKULLS BY X‐RAY PICTURES OF THE FRONTAL SINUSES 1980Radiologic Identification of Unknown Human Remains 1990Value of the frontal sinus in identification of unknown persons.1951The roentgenological identification of victims of the "Noronic" disaster.2011Skeletal Identification by Radiographic Comparison: Blind Tests of a Morphoscopic Method Using Antemortem Chest Radiographs* ,†,‡

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.