Ruth
The method error statistic is often used for measurements in physical
anthropology, see
TECHNICAL ERROR OF MEASUREMENT - A METHODOLOGICAL CRITIQUE
KNAPP TR
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
87 (2): 235-236 FEB 1992
best wishes
Andrew
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Robert Symmons wrote:
> Dear Ruth
>
> Have you tried the method described by Bland and Altman:
>
> Bland, J. and Altman, D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement
> between two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet 327, 307-310.
>
> Altman, D. and Bland, J. (1983) Measurement in medicine: the analysis of
> method comparison studies. The Statistician 32, 307-317
>
>
>
> As the titles suggest, the method is designed to compare two different
> measurement methods, but it is easily adapted to assess intra-individual
> variation.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> At 12:15 7/18/2003 +0100, Ruth F. Carden, Zoology wrote:
> >Dear all
> >
> >I was wondering if any of ye have advice on methodology re
> >measurement error of osteological measurements. Basically I want
> >to see what my measurement error is like in terms of accuracy and
> >percision. I have 4 extant cervid postcranial sets (foreleg, hindleg
> >and pelvis bones of both male and female, across different age
> >classes - newborns to old ages) and 1 extinct cervid species.. I
> >was the only person measuring all bones, so no intervariation
> >associated with different measurers.
> >
> >I have gone through the literature to date and can't find any definite
> >article (unless I am missing them) in regard to measurement error
> >techniques. Apart from an article by Lynch & O'Sullivan 1993/5.
> >
> >Originally I was thinking of using 2 adults of each sex from each of
> >the extant species and getting 8 replicates and then comparing the
> >means and coefficient of variations. But then perhaps this is
> >overkilling it. Then I was thinking of taking 1 set of adult bones
> >(either sex) from each of the extant species and 1 set from the
> >extinct (sex unknown) and doing 5 replicates and then using CVs
> >etc.
> >
> >Does anyone have any ideas on the subject? Or indeed any help in
> >regard to this. Obviously ye all at some stage would have to take
> >into account measurement error from skeletal samples, so any
> >help or insights from past experiences would be of great help.
> >
> >I hope all is well and looking forward to the replies.
> >Kind regards & Slainte
> >
> >Ruth
> >--------------------------------------
> >Ruth F. Carden B.Sc.
> >Mammal Research Group
> >Zoology Department
> >National University of Ireland, Dublin
> >Belfield, Dublin 4
> >Ireland
> >e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> >Tel: (+)353-1-7162261 (note new number)
> >Fax: (+)353-1-7061152
>
>
=========================================================================
Dr. Andrew Millard [log in to unmask]
Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, Tel: +44 191 334 1147
South Road, Durham. DH1 3LE. United Kingdom. Fax: +44 191 334 1101
http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/
=========================================================================
|