Effects of field size when using Kerley's histological method for determination of age at death

The field size at which a bone is read affects the results obtained when using Kerley's histological method for age estimation, even after applying the recommended correction factor. Whereas there is no tendency for any one of three field sizes tested to consistently underestimate or overestimate age, a field size closest to that used by Kerley in his original study had significantly lower variances for its age estimates, and thus provides greater reliability. This particular field size yields more precise estimates because it is sampling a pattern and number of structures more similar to that of Kerley. Correction factors cannot equalize the counts of osteons and osteon fragments because of spatial variations in the distributions of these histological structures. A field size similar to that used by Kerley in gathering the data from which he developed his regression equations must be used to assure that the same pattern and number of structures is being sampled. For this reason, we suggest a field size as close to 2.06 mm2 as possible be used when employing Kerley's method.