Applicability of the Ricketts' posteroanterior cephalometry for sex determination using logistic regression analysis in Hispano American Peruvians

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Aug 1, 2016
https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.186371
Download
pdf
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 8, Issue 2, May-August 2016

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Ivan Perez
Department of Oral Radiology and Statistics, Dentofacial Disarmonies Research Center, Lima
Allison Chavez
Department of Endodontics, Dental School of Dentistry, Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University, Lima
Dario Ponce
Department of Oral Radiology and Statistics, Dentofacial Disarmonies Research Center, Lima

Abstract

Background: The Ricketts' posteroanterior (PA) cephalometry seems to be the most widely used and it has not been tested by multivariate statistics for sex determination.Objective: The objective was to determine the applicability of Ricketts' PA cephalometry for sex determination using the logistic regression analysis. Materials and Methods: The logistic models were estimated at distinct age cutoffs (all ages, 11 years, 13 years, and 15 years) in a database from 1,296 Hispano American Peruvians between 5 years and 44 years of age. Results: The logistic models were composed by six cephalometric measurements; the accuracy achieved by resubstitution varied between 60% and 70% and all the variables, with one exception, exhibited a direct relationship with the probability of being classified as male; the nasal width exhibited an indirect relationship. Conclusion: The maxillary and facial widths were present in all models and may represent a sexual dimorphism indicator. The accuracy found was lower than the literature and the Ricketts' PA cephalometry may not be adequate for sex determination. The indirect relationship of the nasal width in models with data from patients of 12 years of age or less may be a trait related to age or a characteristic in the studied population, which could be better studied and confirmed.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ivan Perez, Allison Chavez, & Dario Ponce. (2016). Applicability of the Ricketts’ posteroanterior cephalometry for sex determination using logistic regression analysis in Hispano American Peruvians. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 8(2), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.186371
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Perez IE, Chavez AK, Ponce D. Cephalometric norms from posteroanterior Ricketts’ cephalograms from Hispanic American Peruvian non adult patients. Acta Odontol Latinoam 2011;24:265‑71.
  2. Magar SP, Wanjari PV, Phulambrikar T, Mosby SP, Magar SS. Dimorphism of mandibular canine index establishing in sex identity. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol 2011;23:195‑8.
  3. Humphries AL, Ross AH. Craniofacial sexual dimorphism in two Portuguese skeletal samples. Anthropologie 2011;49:13‑20.
  4. Patil KR, Mody RN. Determination of sex by discriminant function analysis and stature by regression analysis: A lateral cephalometric study. Forensic Sci Int 2005;147:175‑80.
  5. Gonzales RA. Determination of sex from juvenile crania by means of discriminant function analysis. J Forensic Sci 2012;57:24‑34.
  6. Funayama M, Aoki Y, Kudo T, Sagisaka K. Sex determination of the human skull based upon line drawing from roentgen cephalograms. Tohoku J Exp Med 1986;149:407‑16.
  7. Townsend GC, Richards LC, Carroll A. Sex determination of Australian Aboriginal skulls by discriminant function analysis. Aust Dent J 1982;27:320‑6.
  8. Scheuer L, Black S. Osteology. In: Thompson T, Black S, editors. Forensic Human Identification: An Introduction. USA: Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 199‑220.
  9. Gonzalez PN, Bernal V, Perez SI. Analysis of sexual dimorphism of craniofacial traits using geometric morphometric techniques. Int J Osteoarchaeol 2011;21:82‑91.
  10. Molleson T, Cruse K, Mays S. Some sexual dimorphic features of the human juvenile skull and their value in sex determination in immature skeletal remains. J Archaeol Sci 1998;25:719‑28.
  11. Rösing FW, Graw M, Marré B, Ritz‑Timme S, Rothschild MA, Rötzscher K, et al. Recommendations for the forensic diagnosis of sex and age from skeletons. Homo 2007;58:75‑89.
  12. Hennessy RJ, McLearie S, KinsellaA, Waddington JL. Facial shape and asymmetry by three‑dimensional laser surface scanning covary with cognition in a sexually dimorphic manner. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2006;18:73‑80.
  13. Ceballos JL, Rentschler EH. Roentgen diagnosis of sex based on adult skull characteristics; comparison study of cephalometry of male and female skull films (frontal pro‑projection). Radiology 1958;70:55‑61.
  14. Hsiao TH, Chang HP, Liu KM. Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of lateral radiographic cephalometry. J Forensic Sci 1996;41:792‑5.
  15. Hsiao TH, Tsai SM, Chou ST, Pan JY, Tseng YC, Chang HP, et al. Sex determination using discriminant function analysis in children and adolescents: A lateral cephalometric study. Int J Legal Med 2010;124:155‑60.
  16. Teke HY, Duran S, Canturk N, Canturk G. Determination of gender by measuring the size of the maxillary sinuses in computerized tomography scans. Surg Radiol Anat 2007;29:9‑13.
  17. Williams BA, Rogers TL. Evaluating the accuracy and precision of cranial morphological traits for sex determination. J Forensic Sci 2006;51:729‑35.
  18. Robinson MS, Bidmos MA. The skull and humerus in the determination of sex: Reliability of discriminant function equations. Forensic Sci Int 2009;186:86.e1‑5.