Scientific Working Group for Forensic Anthropology (SWGANTH) 

Personal Identification 

Issue Date: 06/03/2010 

Revision: 0 

Personal Identification 

1.0 Principle, Spirit and Intent 

A personal identification results from the comparison of antemortem and postmortem 

information. Forensic anthropologists should evaluate and compare antemortem and 

postmortem skeletal information in a systematic manner for the purpose of facilitating a 

scientifically reliable identification using appropriate techniques. 

2.0 Purpose and Scope 

The postmortem identification process is an integral aspect of the medicolegal death 

investigation, and identifying human remains is important for both legal and 

humanitarian reasons. Forensic anthropologists frequently assist in the identification of 

human remains through the comparison of antemortem and postmortem skeletal 

information. The extent to which the forensic anthropologist is utilized in making or 

assisting with a personal identification differs based on jurisdiction, as well as the needs 

and constraints of the laboratory with which they are associated. 

This document presents guidelines for anthropological contributions to the personal 

identification process. Practitioners of forensic anthropology should implement these 

guidelines to the fullest extent as applicable, practical and appropriate. In the absence of 

specific guidelines or procedures, or in the case of conflicting procedures, the principle, 

spirit and intent should be met. 

3.0 General Principles 

Forensic anthropologists contribute to identification at two levels. The first level is 

through methods that establish positive identification. The second level is through 

methods that contribute to an identification by limiting potential matches to the individual. 

When appropriate, forensic anthropologists should consider consulting other experts 

including odontologists, pathologists, radiologists, and imaging experts. 

Consideration should be given to the temporal interval between the antemortem and 

postmortem information.

1
4.0 Methods of Positive Identification 

A positive identification can be made in cases when the antemortem and postmortem 

information match in sufficient detail to conclude that they are from the same individual 

to the exclusion of all other reasonable possibilities. For forensic anthropology, these 

methods may include comparative radiography and the comparison of surgical implants. 

Conclusions that can be reached are: identification, exclusion, and insufficient evidence. 

4.1 Comparative Radiography 

Radiographic images taken during life as part of diagnostic procedures may capture 

skeletal features useful for identification. Comparative radiography is an identification 

technique involving the direct (side-by-side) comparison of antemortem radiographs of a 

missing person with those obtained from the remains. 

The procedure for identification by comparative radiography typically involves obtaining 

antemortem radiographs of the suspected deceased, producing postmortem radiographs 

that simulate the antemortem radiographs in scope and projection, and performing a 

point-by-point comparison, looking for consistencies and inconsistencies in (for example): 

 Bone morphology 

 Trabecular patterns 

 Orientation and placement of foreign materials, including bullets, shrapnel, 

surgical implements 

 Skeletal anomalies, pathological conditions, and trauma including healed fractures, 

surgical intervention, enteric accretions 

 Skull features, including paranasal sinuses, sella turcica, cranial sutures, 

mandibular canal 

 Dental features, including morphology, restorations, pathologies, missing teeth 

There is not an established minimum number of points of concordance or a threshold for 

the quality of consistencies necessary to support a positive identification. The 

antemortem and postmortem radiographs should match in sufficient detail to conclude 

that they are from the same individual with no unexplainable differences. Consideration 

should be given to the uniqueness or populational frequencies of particular skeletal 

features, if known. 

4.2 Surgical Implants 

Although not their specific purview, forensic anthropologists may provide information 

regarding surgical implants as part of their skeletal analysis. 

 

Surgical implants (e.g., surgical implements, artifacts, appliances) often have serial 

numbers and stamps of the manufacturer, and may be linked with an individual or 

associated with a particular shipment of surgical implements that can be tracked to a 

specific area during a certain time period. 

2
The procedure for identification using surgical implants typically involves locating and 

identifying the manufacturer’s symbol along with unique serial number from the device, 

and contacting local/national registries or the manufacturer for information associated 

with that number. In some cases, it is possible to link the device to a specific individual. 

In other cases, surgical implants may only be useful in narrowing the search (or as one of 

multiple lines of evidence), since not all devices have a unique serial number and 

registries may not necessarily provide adequate information to associate the surgical 

implement with a particular individual. 

5.0 Methods Contributing to Identification 

Forensic anthropologists may also contribute to identification through methods that are 

not generally considered sufficient for positive identification. The more distinctive or 

unusual the characteristics, or the greater the number of corresponding factors, the 

stronger the contribution is to an identification. 

Conclusions that can be reached from these methods are: consistent with, or not 

consistent with. 

5.1 Biological Profile

In some cases there is no basis for assumption of identification and no circumstantial 

clues to suggest identity. In these cases, an anthropological (skeletal) analysis may be 

used to assess biological information about the individual including the age, sex, ancestry, 

and living stature of an individual to lead to a tentative identification. For best practices 

in generating the biological profile, refer to the corresponding SWGANTH guidelines. 

This assessment, though useful in narrowing the pool of potential candidates in the search 

for identity, is not a positive identification. The biological information is compared to 

documented information or databases of missing persons, and based on fit with the 

biological profile, individuals may be included or excluded from further consideration. 

A biological profile consistent with documented information about the presumed victim, 

in addition to other corresponding lines of evidence, can provide corroborative evidence 

of identification. 

5.2 Charts and Notes 

Written or charted medical and/or dental records may contain documented features or 

patterns useful for identification. The procedure for identification by written records 

comparison typically involves obtaining antemortem medical or dental charts and/or 

notes on the suspected deceased, and comparing them to features of the skeletal remains, 

looking for consistencies and inconsistencies. In some cases, a measured value of 

uniqueness of result may be used (e.g., OdontoSearch). 

3
Note that medical and dental charts and notes are not necessarily accurate or current 

representations of an individual’s medical or dental record. Problems may arise due to 

insufficient recording, mistakes in recording, insurance fraud, or the passage of time. 

There may also be differences in the recording systems used. 

5.3 Anomalies and Pathological Conditions 

Records of injuries, pathological conditions, and anomalies may also be very useful for 

identification. Identification proceeds by describing and differentially diagnosing the 

trait, lesion, defect or wound on the skeleton, and conducting appropriate research or 

comparisons. The more uncommon the pathological condition or anomaly, the more 

potential it may have in contributing to identification. For best practices in documenting 

and reporting skeletal pathological conditions and anomalies, refer to the corresponding 

SWGANTH guidelines. 

Be cautious in excluding individuals due to the absence of the condition in the medical 

record. Identified skeletal conditions may have been subclinical and therefore 

undocumented at the time of death or at the time the medical record was prepared. 

Conversely, if the medical records indicate a pathological condition in the skeleton (such 

as a fracture) and no condition can be found, this could be the result of complete osseous 

remodeling or may be the basis for excluding an identification. 

5.4 Skull-Photo Superimposition 

Skull-photo superimposition (also known as photographic superimposition or video 

superimposition) involves the superimposition of a photograph of a known individual 

with skeletal remains. 

Comparisons should be made between structures visible in both the antemortem and 

postmortem materials. Although techniques for these comparisons vary, standards for 

scaling, positioning, lighting, perspective, and angle should be used to ensure proper 

comparison. 

If differences are found, they should be evaluated to determine if they represent structural 

differences or can be explained by variances in methodology. If structural differences are 

found, they should be evaluated to determine if they can be explained by chronological 

factors. Other differences should be carefully considered as a possible basis for exclusion. 

If shared structures are found, their probative value must then be carefully evaluated as a 

possible basis for identification. 

Given the difficulty in scientifically assessing the uniqueness of human faces, statements 

regarding the power or value of craniofacial superimpositions should be carefully 

presented so as to properly present the probative value of the information. Craniofacial 

superimposition is often hampered by inadequate antemortem photograph quality that can 

affect the structural comparisons and influence the nature of the final conclusions. 

4
5.5 Comparative Photography 

Antemortem photographs may be utilized in a direct comparison with the skeletal portion, 

or a photograph of that skeletal portion. Antemortem photographs, such as those showing 

marked asymmetry of the face in relation to the cranial vault and antemortem 

photographs of disfigured limbs due to poorly set osseous fractures, can each be utilized. 

In cases where these patterns or features can be considered unique to a particular 

individual, this comparison may be sufficient as a single line of evidence. 

There are cases when antemortem photographs may be utilized in a direct comparison 

with the skeletal portion, or a photograph of that skeletal portion, much in the same way 

as described above with radiographic comparisons. Examples of these photographic 

comparisons include the use of antemortem photographs of the occlusal surfaces of the 

dentition (utilizing the morphology of cusps, restorations, sealants, or tori) and 

antemortem facial photographs which show the facial surfaces of individual teeth and/or 

missing teeth. 

6.0 Additional Considerations 

6.1 Personal Effects and Other Material Evidence 

Valuable information can be gleaned from the material evidence and personal effects that 

are associated with human remains. Because of their training, forensic anthropologists 

can provide insight into analysis and interpretation of this evidence to work towards an 

identification. Such information may not typically be included in the anthropology report, 

but should be included in the case notes. 

6.2 Facial Approximation 

The practice of facial approximation is intended to capture public attention in regards to a 

case, and to suggest persons to whom the remains might belong when all other scientific 

leads have been exhausted. Facial approximation should NOT be used as a means of 

personal identification. For best practices, refer to the SWGANTH guidelines on Facial 

Approximation. 

6.3 Identification of the Living 

Some forensic anthropologists may be involved in identifying living persons through 

forensic image analysis (often utilized in cases involving criminal perpetrators or 

children). These techniques can involve the comparison of morphological features, facial 

proportionality, and quantitative biometric analyses. Refer to FISWG guidelines for 

further information. 

5
6.4 Databases 

Forensic anthropologists with appropriate authority should contribute the results of their 

analyses of unidentified individuals to national databases of missing and unidentified 

persons (e.g. NamUs, NCIC). For identified skeletal remains, information should be 

provided to the University of Tennessee Forensic Databank. 

6