Gender-Based Estimation of Physical Stature Using Percutaneous Lengths of Two Adult Long Bones in a North Indian...

Accurate estimation of stature from skeletal remains is an essential component of forensic anthropology and medico-legal investigations. For this purpose, long bones are among the most reliable indicators, yet their predictive value varies across populations due to genetic and environmental factors.

This cross-sectional observational study was designed using a North Indian adult population to predict stature using long bones (humerus and tibia), individually and in combination, and to compare their predictive accuracy in both genders.

The study was conducted on 164 healthy adult medical students and working professionals [82 males (M), 82 females (F)], aged 18-55 years at a tertiary care institution, after due institutional ethical clearance. Stature, humerus, and tibia length were measured using standardized anthropometric techniques. Simple linear/multiple linear regression analyses were utilized to predict stature.

The mean stature of all participants was 165.3 ± 8.7 cm, and the humerus length and tibia length for both genders were noted to be 28.6 ± 2.4cm and 38.9 ± 2.6 cm, respectively. Pearson correlation analysis showed a moderate to very strong correlation with humerus (M: r = 0.719, F: r = 0.595) and tibia (M: r = 0.809, F: r = 0.764) length with stature in both genders. In males, the simple linear regression models showed good reliability, with R² values of 0.65 for tibia length and 0.51 for humerus length. The multiple linear regression model using both bone lengths together further improved accuracy, giving an R² of 0.74. In females, humerus (R² = 0.35) and tibia (R² = 0.58) models showed lower reliability, although the combined model produced a better R² of 0.64. The best regression equation to predict stature in males was Stature= 91.32 + 1.34 (tibia) + 0.90 (humerus) at R² = 0.74, whereas in females it was Stature = 67.97 + 1.77 (tibia) + 0.88 (humerus) at R² = 0.646 for the studied population. The study corroborated previous findings that the tibia is a strong predictor and that both bones predict better than a single bone; however, the current values are different from those in previous studies and reflect the changing trends and diversity of the studied population in this region.

Gender-specific regression models enhance precision, as correlations were stronger in males than in females. In both genders, the combined humerus and tibia bones lengths provide a more accurate estimate of stature, and tibia length is a better predictor than humerus length in the case of a single long bone. These findings emphasize the forensic, anthropology, and medical research utility of humerus and tibia measurements in stature estimation within the North Indian population. Further research with other long bone combination and a larger sample size, including higher age groups along with diverse populations, could refine these findings and build upon the results of this study.