Infra‐cranial radiographic comparison for human identification: A study of analyst expertise

Radiographic comparison for identification is widely utilized. However, these methods are qualitative and subject to analyst ability to correctly read and interpret radiographs. With regards to infra-cranial radiographs, few studies have been conducted to explore the role of practitioner expertize on correct classification rates (CCRs). Here, we undertake two such studies using forensic anthropologists [American Board of Forensic Anthropology (ABFA) certified, practicing but not board-certified anthropologists, and chest radiograph comparison (CXR) anthropologists trained via the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency CXR competency training program] and compare their results to novices. To ensure participants only referred to the same skeletal morphology, we cropped radiographs to single bones. An array of four simulated antemortem radiographs was presented to each assessor with each postmortem radiograph. Assessors evaluated arrays for a correct match, which was always present, yielding a 25% rate for random correct selections. Study 1 used anteroposterior C7, posteroanterior second metacarpal, and lateral calcaneus radiographs (three arrays each for nine arrays total), which yielded 86, 81, 69, and 68% mean CCRs for CXR experts, ABFA anthropologists, non-ABFA anthropologists and novices, respectively. Study 2 used anteroposterior C7 and left clavicles (three arrays each for six arrays total), yielding mean CCRs of 100, 96, and 84% for CXR experts, ABFA anthropologists and novices, respectively. As reflected by the CCRs, expertise is clearly a factor for radiographic comparisons, evident not just between novices and anthropologists, but also between anthropologists. We recommend all radiographic comparison analysts be subject to competency/proficiency tests prior to their engagement for forensic casework.