首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      


Technical note: The effect of midshaft location on the error ranges of femoral and tibial cross‐sectional parameters
Authors:Vladimír Sládek  Margit Berner  Patrik Galeta  Lukáš Friedl  Šárka Kudrnová
Institution:1. Department of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, 128 43, Prague 2, Czech Republic;2. Institute of Vertebrate Biology, AS CR, 603 65, Brno, Czech Republic;3. Department of Anthropology, Natural History Museum, Vienna, Austria;4. Department of Anthropology, University of West Bohemia in Pilsen, 30614, Pilsen, Czech Republic;5. Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70118;6. Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, 128 43, Prague 2, Czech Republic
Abstract: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. Am J Phys Anthropol 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Keywords:biomechanical analysis  cross‐section  femora  tibiae  error range
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号