MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386431528 · doi:10.48165/jiafm.2023.45.2.12

A Cross Sectional Descriptive Study for Estimation of Stature from Foot Length in South Indian Population

2023· article· en· W4386431528 on OpenAlexaff
Vijay Kumar Subbiah, K Shruthi, Priyanka Anand, J Tejas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDermatoglyphics and Human Traits
Canadian institutionsSt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLinear regressionDemographyFoot (prosody)Short staturePopulationRegression analysisCorrelationVeterinary medicineStatisticsMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification can be done by a myriad of methods and of them includes the measurement of stature by foot length The Study population includes the faculty and students of a tertiary medical care college and hospital and the residents of a district in South India between the ages group of 21-40 years. 200 members consisting of 100 male and 100 female were chosen by stratified random sampling. The height was measured by using standard height measuring instrument and foot length by a vernier calliper. A highly significant correlation was found between Stature and RFL(r=0.811) with the strength of association being more in males (r=0.677) than females (r=0.592). Ahighly significant correlation was also found between Stature and LFL (r=0.823) with the strength of association again being more in males (r=0.707) than in females (r=0.582). Between the two feet, the stature showed highly significant strong correlation with LFL (r=0.823) 2 when compared to RFL (r=0.811). By comparing the r and r values in different study groups it is seen that pooled sample shows better correlation than individual sex. Regression equations were developed for individual sex and also for the pooled data. Stature showed a highly significant positive correlation with both foot lengths with the RFL exhibiting a slightly stronger association. Regression equation for stature developed in this study with respect to the pooled data exhibited a better goodness of fit for the Left foot length

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Indian Academy of Forensic MedicineSame topicDermatoglyphics and Human TraitsFrench-language works237,207