The histological identification of interglobular dentine (IGD) in archeological human remains with macroscopic evidence of rickets has opened a promising new avenue for the investigation of metabolic disease in the past. Recent paleopathological studies have shown that histological analysis of archeological human teeth may allow the identification of periods of vitamin D deficiency occurring within very narrow developmental windows, yielding new information on the seasonality or even maternal-fetal transmission of this disease. However, currently available techniques for recording IGD rely on subjective scoring systems or visual estimations, potentially leaving them open to inter and intra-observer error and rendering comparisons of datasets difficult. Here we describe a new imaging protocol that utilizes open access software and may yield more objective and quantitative data on the amount of IGD present within a dentinal region of interest. We demonstrate that grayscale histograms in FIJI®/ImageJ® might be used to provide less subjective estimates of the percentage of a region of interest affected by IGD. Application of this technique may enable more accurate comparison of datasets between researchers.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 September 2020.
All research outputs
#21,993,012
of 34,332,182 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Physical Anthropology
#2,814
of 3,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,669
of 456,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Physical Anthropology
#37
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,332,182 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,894 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 456,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
