↓ Skip to main content

Sexual dimorphism of the lateral angle of the internal auditory canal and its potential for sex estimation of burned human skeletal remains

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Legal Medicine, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Sexual dimorphism of the lateral angle of the internal auditory canal and its potential for sex estimation of burned human skeletal remains
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00414-015-1154-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Gonçalves, Tim J. U. Thompson, Eugénia Cunha

Abstract

The potential of the petrous bone for sex estimation has been recurrently investigated in the past because it is very resilient and therefore tends to preserve rather well. The sexual dimorphism of the lateral angle of the internal auditory canal was investigated in two samples of cremated Portuguese individuals in order to assess its usefulness for sex estimation in burned remains. These comprised the cremated petrous bones from fleshed cadavers (N = 54) and from dry and disarticulated bones (N = 36). Although differences between males and females were more patent in the sample of skeletons, none presented a very significant sexual dimorphism, thus precluding any attempt of sex estimation. This may have been the result of a difficult application of the method and of a differential impact of heat-induced warping which is known to be less frequent in cremains from dry skeletons. Results suggest that the lateral angle method cannot be applied to burned human skeletal remains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Master 4 10%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 25%
Social Sciences 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Arts and Humanities 4 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 11 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2015.
All research outputs
#14,150,855
of 22,786,691 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#764
of 2,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,075
of 352,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,061 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.