Page 1 of 4

Scientific Working Group for Forensic Anthropology (SWGANTH) 

Stature Estimation

Issue date: 08/02/2012 

Revision: 1

Stature Estimation

1.0 Principle, Spirit and Intent 

Stature estimation is one of several biological parameters that may be usefully compared with 

antemortem records to include or exclude possible identifications of missing persons. Stature 

estimation is made possible by the relationship of skeletal dimensions with living height. Skeletal 

remains will be analyzed in a reliable and systematic manner for the purpose of estimating 

stature using appropriate techniques and the stature estimation process documented. 

2.0 Purpose and Scope 

These guidelines outline recommended approaches for estimating adult stature from skeletal 

elements or mostly skeletonized remains. Practitioners of forensic anthropology should 

implement these guidelines to the extent applicable, practical and appropriate. In the absence of 

specific guidelines or in the case of conflicting procedures, the principle, spirit and intent should 

be met. 

3 .0 General Principles 

Stature is usually estimated from the skeleton in one of two ways: 1) measuring all bones 

constituting the components of stature, summing those measurements and correcting for the 

missing soft tissue, or 2) employing a regression formula with the measurement of a complete 

bone. Other methods include employing incomplete limb bones, non-limb bones and alternative 

statistical methods. In selecting the method to be used, consideration of the individual’s 

population, sex and temporal cohort is warranted. Additionally, the method chosen is dependent 

on the presence and condition of the skeletal remains. Alternate statistical approaches (e.g., 

maximum likelihood estimation) exist to estimate stature. Appreciation of the statistical 

foundations of these approaches provides an understanding of the advantages and limitations to 

the various methods. Forensic anthropologists should be cognizant that living stature (i.e., 

missing person’s recorded height) may be derived from various sources including self-reported 

stature, family remembrance, or direct measurement.

4.0 Best Practices 

If complete remains are present, either the anatomical or regression methods should be used. The 

measurement guidelines for the chosen technique should be followed. When complete skeletons 
Page 2 of 4

or whole limb bones are not available or external factors require altering best practices, other 

means of estimating stature may be employed including the use of fragmentary limb bones and 

non-limb bones. The precision and accuracy of these alternative methods may be less than those 

approaches presented in the previous section. Additional adjustments to all methods should also 

be considered where appropriate. 

4.1 Anatomical Method (Also known as Complete Skeleton Method) 

The anatomical method should provide the most accurate estimate of an individual’s living 

height. Use of the anatomical method is acceptable when skeletal elements constituting stature 

are available and minimally damaged. Its use is recommended when the ancestry and sex of the 

individual cannot be estimated, there are an anomalous number of vertebrae or the individual’s 

limb bones appear to be atypical in length. 

4.2 Complete Limb Bones (Also known as the Mathematical Method or Regression 

Approach) 

This approach requires measuring a limb bone length or bone lengths, selecting the most 

appropriate regression formula by sex and ancestry, inserting the measurement into the formula, 

and calculating the estimated stature. 

Instruments and measurements appropriate for the method are employed. For most standards, the 

limb bone measurements are usually maximum lengths. In addition to formulae for individual 

limb bones, there are also regression formulae for multiple bones. In stature estimation using 

multiple bones, lengths of two or more bones are added and that sum employed in the formula. 

A variety of formulae are available by sex for a number of populations. For accurate stature 

estimation, formulae from the most similar population, the same sex and temporal cohort should 

be selected. In addition, the type of stature (e.g., self-reported vs. direct measurement) to be 

estimated should be considered for identification comparisons.

After controlling for sex, ancestry and temporal cohort, the best formula is the one with the 

smallest prediction interval. The formula with the smallest standard error usually employs an 

element of the lower limb or combined elements including the lower limb bones. Whatever the 

element or elements—lower limb bones or not—the formula with the smallest prediction interval 

should be the most accurate and precise, and should be employed in the stature estimation. 

A prediction interval should be reported with the estimated stature. To accommodate the range of 

variation, the 90 percent or 95 percent prediction intervals are generally employed. 

4.3 Fragmentary Limb Bones 

Fragmentary limb bones may be used in regression formulae to estimate stature. Some of these 

methods require estimating bone length and then estimating stature based on the estimated bone 

length, thus compounding the error present in the estimation. Other techniques employing 
Page 3 of 4

fragmentary remains estimate stature directly from the fragment, without requiring the second 

step of the previous method. 

4.4 Non-Limb Bones 

Non-limb bones (e.g., skulls, innominates, and bones of the hands or feet) may also be used to 

estimate stature, and in combinations with limb bones may be as accurate as other approaches. 

4.5 Considerations and Adjustments 

In addition to the variation inherent in the above methods, various other factors and adjustments 

should be considered when estimating stature, including: 

Stature decreases with advancing adult age. The anatomical method will provide the most 

accurate estimate of true height at the time of death. Regression methods estimate a maximum 

living height and may not include stature reduction associated with advancing adult age. If 

regression methods are reported then it should be with the understanding that they may provide

an overestimation of the actual height at death. While age correction methods exist to account 

for stature loss with age, their application is problematic. 

Some stature estimation techniques are based on samples using cadaver length, not living stature. 

Depending on the manner the cadaver was measured and adjustments in the techniques to 

approximate living stature, the stature estimation may be inaccurate. 

When using regression methods, some individuals may fall outside the typical stature interval for 

the population (e.g., particularly short and tall persons), and the estimation of their statures may 

be less accurate than those with more typical statures. 

Pathological conditions may adversely affect stature estimation. 

When standards are not available for a target population, caution should be used when estimating 

stature. 

Estimating stature of subadults should be done with caution. The paucity of research related to 

estimating statures of subadults makes these estimations suspect. 

5.0 Unacceptable Practices 

The following practices are considered unacceptable and should be avoided when estimating 

stature: 

The use of Trotter’s formulae using tibia measurements without making proper 

adjustments. Trotter’s tibia measurement apparently excluded the medial malleolus 
Page 4 of 4

(Trotter and Gleser 1952, Trotter 1970), although she reported her measurement included 

the medial malleolus. 

Reporting a point estimation alone when the regression approach is used. Include an 

explicit prediction interval. 

Reporting a “range” for a stature estimation based on a regression formula. Statistically 

speaking, range is the difference between a variable’s minimum and maximum observed 

values. “Interval” is a more appropriate term. 

Using multiple stature estimation formulae and then averaging those estimations to 

produce a single estimation. This approach reduces the accuracy of the estimation and is 

unacceptable. The single formula with the smallest standard error should be used and its 

results presented, not an average of estimations. 

Using the estimated mean bone length in a whole bone stature regression formula when 

estimating stature from a fragmentary bone length, without including the additional error 

such an approach requires. Omitting either error factor produces an unrealistically small 

estimation of error in living stature. 

6.0 References Cited 

Trotter, Mildred, and Goldine C. Gleser 

1952 Estimation of Stature from Long Bones of American Whites and Negroes. 

American Journal of Physical Anthropology 10:463-514. 

Trotter, Mildred 

1970 Estimation of Stature from Intact Long Limb Bones. In T.D. Stewart (ed.) Personal 

Identification in Mass Disasters, pp. 71-84. Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of 

Natural History, Washington, DC.