青少年活体年龄推断的方法比较  

A comparison between methods of age estimation in teenagers

作　　者：陆惠玲[1] 郑晶[1] 顾学安[1] 台运春[1] 廖信彪[2] 

机构地区：[1]中山大学中山医学院法医物证学教研室,广东广州510089 [2]广东省公安厅刑事技术中心,广东广州510050

出　　处：《中国法医学杂志》2002年第S1期27-29,共3页Chinese Journal of Forensic Medicine

摘　　要：目的探讨准确推断青少年活体年龄的方法。方法对233名青少年活体年龄鉴定案所涉及的案件性质、作案距鉴定的间隔时间、自报年龄与鉴定年龄差距等进行归类、分析,并就其中130名骨骺尚未完全愈合的男性青少年的年龄,用多元回归方程法、CHN计分法和本文作者设计的综合法分别进行推断,统计前两个方法与综合法的符合率。结果 归类分析显示:本组资料,刑事案件当事人的涉案性质,抢劫、抢夺的占72.10％;作案距鉴定的间隔时间小于6个月的占75.10％;自报年龄小于鉴定年龄的占60.73％。用多元回归方程法、CHN计分法鉴定年龄与综合法鉴定年龄的符合率分别为90.77％与83.08％。结论活体年龄鉴定应在作案后尽早进行;用多元回归方程法鉴定18岁左右的年龄较CHN计分法准确,采用综合法鉴定年龄可能更好。Objective To find out a relatively accurate teenagers' age estimation method.Method 233 cases were collected with emphasis to their type of crime, the intervals from commitment of the crime to age assessment, and the differences between self - reported and appraised age. By regression equation (method 1), CHN evaluation (method 2) and comprehensive method designed by the authors (method 3), 130 male teenagers whose osteophiph-ysis hadn' t been closed were compared and analyzed, statistically andyzed by Chi square test. Results The analysis showed : (1) 72.10% cases were of plundering and robbing type. (2) The intervals from commitment of the crime to age assessment in 75.10% cases were less than six months. (3) Self- reported ages in 60.73% cases were less than appraised age. (4) The accordance rate between method 1, method 2 to method 3 was 90.77% and 83.08% respectively. Conclusion The age estimation on living body should be performed as soon as possible after commitment of the case, and method 1 seems to be more accurate than method 2 in estimating 18 years-old person,and the method designed by us should be better than the other two.

关 键 词：法医人类学 骨龄 年龄推断 青少年 

分 类 号：D919[医药卫生—法医学]