Table 10.
Evaluation of the methods based on Gleiser and Gunt criteria [18]. When two values are given, they correspond to the metrics obtained on males/females
| Evaluation work | Population | n | Age | Estimation method | E (DA-CA) | AE (|DA-CA|) | SE | R2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| μ | σ | med. | μ | σ | med. | |||||||
| Alkandiri et al. [91] | Kuwaiti | 375 | 5–15 | Moorrees et al. [19] | − 0.89/− 1.01 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Berkvens et al. [64] | Canadian | 361 | 8–30 | Moorrees et al. [19] | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 0.09 |
| Metsäniitty et al. [117] | Somali | 803 | 3–23 | Kohler et al. [20] | − 0.29/− 0.30 | – | – | 1.39/1.30 | – | – | – | – |
| Rodríguez et al. [132] | Mexican | 182 | 6–15 | Moorrees et al. [19] | − 0.03/ + 0.34 | – | – | 0.63/0.98 | – | – | – | – |
| Jayaraman et al. [133] | Hispanic American | 600 | 6–17 | Moorrees et al. [19] | − 0.07 | 0.45 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Fulton and Liversidge [148] | British | 940 | 3–16 | Moorrees et al. [19] | − 0.22 | 2.08 | – | 1.42 | – | – | – | – |
| Štepanovskỳ et al. [149] | Czech | 976 | 3–20 | Moorrees et al. [19] | – | – | – | 0.64 | – | – | – | – |
| Sartori et al. [150] | Brazilian | 1062 | 15—24 | Kohler et al. [20] | − 1.30 | 2.10 | – | 2.00 | 1.50 | – | – | – |