Testing inter-observer reliability of the Transition Analysis aging method on the William M. Bass forensic skeletal collection.

OBJECTIVES: Skeletal age estimation is an integral part of the biological profile. Recent work shows how multiple-trait approaches better capture senescence as it occurs at different rates among individuals. Furthermore, a Bayesian statistical framework of analysis provides more useful age estimates. The component-scoring method of Transition Analysis (TA) may resolve many of the functional and statistical limitations of traditional phase-aging methods and is applicable to both paleodemography and forensic casework. The present study contributes to TA-research by validating TA for multiple, differently experienced observers using a collection of modern forensic skeletal cases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five researchers independently applied TA to a random sample of 58 documented individuals from the William M. Bass Forensic Skeletal Collection, for whom knowledge of chronological age was withheld. Resulting scores were input into the ADBOU software and maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were produced using the forensic prior. Krippendorff's alpha was used to evaluate interrater reliability and agreement. Inaccuracy and bias were measured to gauge the magnitude and direction of difference between estimated ages and chronological ages among the five observers.

RESULTS: The majority of traits had moderate to excellent agreement among observers (≥0.6). The superior surface morphology had the least congruence (0.4), while the ventral symphyseal margin had the most (0.9) among scores. Inaccuracy was the lowest for individuals younger than 30 and the greatest for individuals over 60. Consistent over-estimation of individuals younger than 30 and under-estimation of individuals over 40 years old occurred. Individuals in their 30s showed a mixed pattern of under- and over-estimation among observers.

DISCUSSION: These results support the use of the TA method by researchers of varying experience levels. Further, they validate its use on forensic cases, given the low error overall.