Background: Sexual dimorphism plays a vital role in individual identification, and body dimensions can contribute to establishing a biological profile for identification purposes. Aims and Objectives: To determine the reliability of the Heel–Ball Index (HBI) in estimating sex from foot dimensions and footprint dimensions and also to investigate the potential of dimensions and indices, using a standardized value, in estimating sex, from foot dimensions and footprint dimensions. Materials and Methods: In this study, a group of 112 young Indian adults aged 18 to 22, consisting of 56 males and 56 females, was examined. The foot breadth at ball (BBAL) and foot breadth at heel (BHEL) of both feet were measured using sliding digital calipers from foot and footprint dimensions. Results: Significant sexual dimorphism was observed in BBAL, BHEL, and HBI (HBI = BHEL/BBAL × 100) measurements in both feet of both sexes. Conclusion: HBI yielded better accuracy for foot dimensions than footprint dimensions. It was also found that utilizing absolute foot dimensions (BBAL and BHEL) yielded more accurate results in estimating sex compared to the HBI, which is calculated as a ratio of absolute measurements.
ReddyKSN. The Essentials of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology. 29th ed. Medical Book company; 2010:53.
2.
KrogmanWMIscanYM. The human skeleton in forensic medicine. 2nd ed. Charles C.Thomas Pub.Ltd; 1986.
3.
ShettySSChandrakanthHVPramod KumarGNPaiVNageshKR. Buccolingual width of mandibular canines in sex determination: A south Karnataka perspective. J South India Medico-Legal Assoc. 2014;6(2):49-54.
4.
HemyNFlavelAIshakNIFranklinD. Sex estimation using anthropometry of feet and footprints in a western Australian population. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;231(1-3):402.e1-402.e6.
5.
KrishanKKanchanTPassiNDimaggioJA. Heel-Ball (HB) Index: sexual dimorphism of a new index from foot dimensions. J Forensic Sci. 2011;57(1):172-175.
MoudgilRKaurRMenezesRGKanchanTGargRK. Foot index: is it a tool for sex determination?J Forensic Leg Med. 2008;15(4):223-226.
8.
SenJKanchanTGhoshS. Sex estimation from foot dimensions an indigenous Indian population. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(S1):S148-S153.
9.
KrishanK. Estimation of stature from foot outline and footprint dimensions in Gujjars of north India. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;175(2-3):93-101.
10.
KanchanTKrishanKPrustyDMachadoM. Heel-Ball Index: An analysis of footprint dimensions of sex. Egyptian J Forensic Sci. 2014;4(2):29-33.
11.
AbleduJKOffeiEBAntwiEM. Determination of sex from footprint dimensions in a Ghanaian population. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0139891.
12.
KanchanTKrishanKSharmaAMenezesRG. A study of correlation of hand and foot dimensions for personal identification in mass disasters. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;199(1-3):112.e1-112.e6.
13.
KrishanKSharmaA. Estimation of stature from dimensions of hands and feet in north Indian population. J Forensic Leg Med. 2007;14(6):327-332.
14.
RaniMTyagiAKRangaVKRaniY. Stature estimates from foot dimensions. J Punjab Acad Forensic Med Toxicol. 2011;11(1):26-28.
NirenbergMSAnsertEKrishanKKanchanT. Two-dimensional metric comparisons between dynamic bare and sock-clad footprints for its forensic implications – a pilot study. Sci Justice. 2018;58(1):43-49.
17.
ŠvábováPCaplováZBeňušRChovancováMMasnicováS.Estimation of stature and body weight from static and dynamic footprints – forensic implications and validity of non-colouring cream method. Forensic Sci Int. 2022;330:111105.
