Dermatoglyphics, derived from greek words derma (skin),and glyphics(curved), referes to the scientific study of the pattern of epidermal ridges on the fingertips, palms and soles of the feet. These patterns are genetically determined and develop during 13th to 19th weeks of fetal life.Their permanence, uniqueness and genetic basis have made them a subject of sustained scientific analysis across multiple disciplines including anatomy, forensic medicine, and genetics.

The history of dermatoglyphics dates to 1684, when Nehemiah Grew described the unique patterns found on people's fingertips in his publication presented to the London's Royal College of Physicians [1 ]. Further, G. Bidloo used detailed drawings to show fingerprints. In 1685, in his book Anatomia Humani Corporis (Amsterdam: Utrecht Edition 1685). In 1788, the original proponent of fingerprint analysis [ 2], J.C.A. Mayer, made the claim that each person's skin ridge pattern is distinct, But some people are more alike than others[3 ]. Later, In 1823, J.E. Purkinje was the first who classified patterns into nine categories[4]. To prevent forgery of native contracts in 1858, W.J. Herschel, chief magistrate of the Hooghly district in West Bengal, India, was the first to use fingerprints [5 ] . Galton’s 1892 published book ‘Fingerprints’ classified patterns into arches, loops and whorls, proving their uniqueness and permanence, and establishing the scientific foundation of dermatoglyphics [6 ] . Harold Cummins, widely regarded as the founder of dermatoglyphics, first used the term in 1926, and firstly used dermatoglyphics in clinical medicine [7,8]. In 1943, He also published a book ‘An introduction to Dermatoglyphics’ with the help of Midlo [ 9].

Scientific data indicates a strong correlation between dermatoglyphics and cerebral functions, as the development of the brain and the epidermal ridges of the hand from embryonic ectoderm transpires concurrently from ectoderm during second trimester. [10,11] Cognitive talents are predominantly associated with the cerebral cortex [ 12]. Students' cognitive engagement including verbal skills, auditory processing, and memory, is manifested in academic assessments (both qualitative and quantitative). Students’ academic brain activity is reflected in academic evaluations (qualitative and quantitative evaluation). Numerous studies demonstrate a correlation between particular dermatoglyphic patterns and intellect, as well as academic achievement [13,14,15]. The assessment of intelligence is a significant aspect of psychology that plays a crucial function in society. Individuals with a low intelligence quotient (IQ) encounter difficulties in learning, reasoning, and assimilating new information, necessitating care. Low IQ is associated with genetic disorders[ 16,17].

Dermatoglyphics are mainly classified into three groups (Fig.-3):

1.ARCHES          2. LOOPS            3.WHORLS

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The present study was conducted on 1st Year Undergraduate medical students (MBBS) of Integral Institute of Medical Sciences & Research (IIMSR),Lucknow, in the Department of Anatomy,on (2024-2025) Batch. Informed consent was obtained after explaining the details of the study.

Inclusion criteria: Students enrolled in 1st Year of Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS), batch of (2024-25) at IIMSR,Lucknow.

Exclusion criteria: Students with skin diseases involving fingertip and those with deformities linked to the fingertips of both hands.

Sample size: A total of 150 enrolled undergraduate medical students of 1st Year were subjected to the research , out of 150 participants, 70 males and 80 females MBBS students.

Material Requied: White papers , Black duplicating ink, Ink pad, Glass slab, Pencil, Magnifying hand lens,Wet wipes.

Study Procedure : The fingerprints of both hands of medical students were taken by using standard Ink method with consent. The prints with the help of magnifying hand lens, the fingertip of both hands of medical students were observed and noted down. .The parameters analysed to study the academic performance of medical students were the marks scored in NEET, which obtained and verified from the NEET marks list avaliable with students.

The Parameters studied were Qualitative, namely :

1. ARCHES 2. LOOPS 3.WHORLS

Galton (1892), classified patterns into three types[ 6]:

Arches – about 5% , Loops – majority, 55 – 65% , Whorls – 30 -35%

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Gathered data was input into an MS-EXCEL spreadsheet and subsequently processed with Azure Data Factory for ingestion and transformation. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. A p-value less than 0.05 ( P < 0.05) was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS:

Study Population: The study included 150 undergraduate medical students, consisting of 70 males and 80 females. Dermatoglyphic patterns of all ten fingertips (1500 prints) were analyzed and classified into Arches , Loops , Whorls. The study showed a predominance of female participants of 53.3% and male students of 46.7%. This indicates that female participants constituted a slightly higher proportion of the study compared to males. So, the study had a female predominance. (Table 1 & Fig.2)

TABLE-01 & FIG.2: Study population (Gender based)

Fig. Gender distribution of the study population(n=150)

Academic Performance Distribution:In this study, 21 students scored between (400-550) considered as High performers, 67 students scored between (350-399) considered as Average performers and 62 students scored between (303-349) as low performers.(Table 2 & Fig.3)

TABLE-02 & FIG. 3: : Academic categories distribution of study population:

Pattern Distribution by Academic performance category and hand

Table 3-8 presents the digit-wise dermatoglyphic pattern distribution for male and female students in each performance category, separately for right and left hands. Each table includes Chi-square value, P- value and significance remark.(NS= Not significant, S= Significant at p < 0.05, HS= Highly significant at p < 0.05).

Table-03; Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in High scored students-Right hand

Interpretation -In high scored students, statistically insignificant association was observed between gender and pattern type across all five digits of the right hand(p > 0.05). loops were the dominant pattern in the Thumb and Little fingers, while Whorls predominated in the Ring and Index fingers for both males and females. This suggests that the gender does not influence fingerprint pattern distribution on the right hand of academically high performing students."

Table-04 Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in High scored students-Left hand

Interpretation -In high scored students, statistically significant associations observed between gender and pattern type at Middle (X²= 10.189, p= 0.006) and Ring finger (X²=9.692, p=0.002) of the left hand, while the  Thumb, Index, Little fingers were statistically insignificant (p>0.05) difference found in both genders.These findings suggests a possible laterality effect in dermatoglyphic gender differences among high academic performers, confined specifically to the left hand Middle and Ring fingers.

Table-05  Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in Average scored students-Right hand

Interpretation-In average scored students, a statistically significant association between gender and fingerprint pattern type was found at the Index finger of the right hand (X²=6.332,p=0.042) while thumb, middle, Ring, and Little showed insignificancy. It is noteworthy that the Thumb finger approached borderline significance (p=0.118), with females showing more Arches than males.

Table-06  Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in Average scored students-Left hand

Interpretation-In average scored students, a highly significant association between gender and fingerprint pattern type was observed at the Little finger of the left hand (X²=27.661, p<0.001). Analysis of the observed frequencies revealed a striking gender difference — males showed a predominance of Whorls while females showed a marked predominance of Loops at this digit, while the Thumb, Index, Middle, Ring fingers were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05) difference found in both genders.These results suggest that the left Little finger may be a particularly sensitive digit for detecting gender-based dermatoglyphic differences in average academic performers.

Table-7  Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in Low scored students-Right hand

Interpretation-In low scored students, no statistically significant association was found between gender and fingerprint pattern type across all five digits of the right hand (p>0.05). The Thumb finger showed a borderline trend (X²=4.925, p=0.085), with females showing relatively more Arches and Loops compared to males. The Little finger showed the least variation between genders (X²=0.064, p=0.968), indicating almost identical pattern distribution between males and females at this digit.

Table-8  Distribution of dermatoglyphic Patterns in Low scored students-Left hand

Interpretation- In low scored students, no statistically significant association was observed between gender and fingerprint pattern type across all five digits of the left hand (p>0.05).Chi-square values were uniformly low across all digits, ranging from 0.063 to 2.180, indicating a very close match between observed and expected frequencies.This table shows themost uniform non-significant results of all six gender-wise tables, reinforcing that dermatoglyphic patterns do not differ meaningfully by gender in this academic subgroups.

DISCUSSION

The current study was performed on 150 MBBS students of 1st Year, Session of (2024-2025) to determine the association between dermatoglyphic patterns and academic performance, when analyzing the overall gender-based distribution of fingerprint patterns across all ten digits, loops were the most prevalent pattern in females, whereas males exhibited a greater frequency of whorls, especially in the left little finger of average-scoring students. This directional finding — with whorls prevalent in males and loops prevalent in females — aligns with the dermatoglyphic literature. Rastogi and Pillai (2010) studied 200 medical students (100 male and100 female) aged 18–25 years at Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, India, and reported that females had a higher prevalence of loops and arches.

Whorls [ 18 ]. Bhavana D et al. (2013) indicated that the predominant pattern in males was whorls (57.09%), whereas in females, it was loops (52.63%)[19] . Amit A. Mehta and Anjulika

1. Mehta (2015) studied 140 first-year MBBS students at Indira Gandhi Government Medical College, Nagpur, comprising 70 males and 70 females, and observed that loops were the most prevalent while arches were the least prevalent in both

genders [20].

The left little finger exhibited statistical significance (p= 0.001) in the entire comparison. In high-scoring pupils, the left middle finger (p = 0.006) and ring finger (p = 0.002) are also statistically significant. In pupils with average scores, the left little finger exhibited significant results (p < 0.001). The pupils with low scores generated the most consistent non-significant outcomes across all left-hand comparisons. The data indicate that the left hand exhibits greater sensitivity to gender-based dermatoglyphic variation than the right hand, suggesting a potential bilateral asymmetry in dermatoglyphic sexual dimorphism. This bilateral asymmetry is corroborated by Sangam, Krupadanam, and Anasuya (2011), who observed a significant bimanual disparity between males and females in Andhra Pradesh.

They found that whorls were less pronounced on the left hand, whereas arches and radial loops exhibited greater density on the left index finger, thereby affirming that the two hands do not exhibit identical gender-based pattern distributions [21 ]. Eze et al. (2020) conducted a study involving 200 medical students in Nigeria and observed that fingerprint patterns were more prevalent in the left hand compared to the right hand. In a gender-based analysis, females exhibited higher loop frequencies in the right hand, while males demonstrated higher whorl frequencies in the left hand. This discrepancy may result from differences in sample size or ethnic origin[ 22].

Loop were the most common pattern and tends to have higher scores on average than those with whorl/ arches. Also, Loops on both hands slightly associate with higher mean NEET scores. This suggests possible positive association between Loop pattern and bettter academic achievement. The present also revealed Arch patterns may be linked with lower NEET performance, though the sample size is small. Similar results reported by Adenowo and Dareb (2016) that distribution of Loop pattern was the highest among the category of high performer students and low percentage distributions of Arch patterns were higher in weak performer students [23 ]. Similarily observed by, Sachan et.al (2022) on 100 physiotherapy students (31 males and 69 females) of 3rd and 4th year of Teerthanker Mahaveer University, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh [ 24].

Limitation:

The present study is a small scale study conducted within a single institute and did not compare the results with students from other institute.

CONCLUSIONS:

In the cross-sectional study of 150 undergraduate medical students, Loops were the predominant dermatoglyphic patterns overall, particularly among females, whereas male showed higher frequency of whorls, indicating a gender-based dimorohism in dermatoglyphic pattern distribution. The left little finger emerged as the most consistent site of significant gender difference across all academic performance categories(p<0.001), with a slight predominance of whorls in the right hand and loops in the left hand, while arches remained the least frequent pattern. Digit-specific significant associations were additionally observed in the left- middle and ring fingers among high scored students and the right index finger among average scored students, though these were not consistent across all groups.With respect to academic performance, loops were more commonly associated with higher scores, showing a slight positive relationship with better academic achievement, whereas whorls and arches were relatively more frequent in lower-performing groups. Arch patterns, in particular, appeared to be associated with lower performance, although the sample size for this pattern was limited.Overall, the study suggests that while dermatoglyphic patterns exhibit certain gender- and digit-specific variations, their association with academic performance is modest and not consistently significant, except for isolated findings. These results highlight the need for further large-scale studies to establish stronger and more reliable correlations.

REFERENCES

1. Penrose LS. Medical significance of finger-prints and related phenomena. Br Med J. 1968;2:321-325. Citing Nehemiah Y (1684). DOI:10.1136/bmj.2.5601.321
2. Cummins H, Midlo C. Finger prints of palms and soles: An Introduction to Dermatoglyphics. New York: Dover Publications Inc.: 1961. Citing Bidloo G. Anatomia Humani Corporis. Amsterdam; 1685; and Malpighi M. De Externo Tactus Organo. London: 1665.
3. Hawthorne MR. Fingerprints: Analysis and Understanding. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2009. p. 3-13. Citing Mayer JCA (1788).
4. Cummins H,Kennedy RW. Purkinje s observations (1823) on fingerprints and other skin features. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1931-1951). 1940;31(3):343-56. DOI:10.2307/1137436
5. Herschel WJ. Skin furrows of the hand. Nature. 1880;23:76. The Encyclopedia of Palmistry. New York: Berkley Publishing Group; 1996. p. 98-124.
6. Sir Francis Galton – “Finger Prints”. London, Mcmillan Co- 1892.
7. Cummins H – Palmar And Plantar Epidermal Ridge Configuration In Americans And Europeans:Am. J. Phy. Anthrop. 1926 : 179: 741- 802.
8. Cummins H ,Dermatoglyphics Stigmata In Mongolism,Anat Record 1936;64 (Suppl 2) :11.
9. Cummins H, Midlo C. Fingerprints, palms and soles: an introduction to dermatoglyphics. 1943. p. 11–15.PMCID: PMC2481993.
10. Hirsch W, Schweighel JU. Morphological evidence concerning the problem of skin ridge formation. J Ment Defic Res. 1973;17(1):58-72.
11. Bagga A. Dermatoglyphics of schizophrenic criminals. In: New horizons in human biology. Proceedings of the UGC National Seminar; 1989 Nov 9-10; Patiala, India. New Delhi: Today & Tomorrow's Printers and Publishers; 1991. p. 135.
12. Etsey K. Causes of Low Academic Performance of Primary School Pupils in the Shama Sub- Metro of Shama Ahanta East Metropolitan Assembly (SAEMA) in Ghana. In Proceedings of the Regional Conference on Education in West Africa; 2005.
13. Ghazvini SD, Khajehpour M. Gender differences in factors affecting academic performance of high school students. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2011;15:1040- 5.
14. Aguilar R, Tansini R. Pre-School Education and School Performance. The Case of Public Schools in Montevideo. Rapport nr: Working Papers in Economics. 2010, Pp. 434.
15. Mlambo V. An analysis of some factors affecting student academic performance in an introductory biochemistry course at the University of the West Indies. Caribbean Teaching Scholar. 2011;1(2):75-88.
16. Rosa A, Gutiérrez B, Guerra A, Arias B, Fañanás L. Dermatoglyphics and abnormal palmar flexion creases as markers of early prenatal stress in children with idiopathic intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res 2001;45(Pt 5) :416- 23. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00351.x
17. Suresh BS, Raghavendra AY. Variations in palmar dermatoglyphics among congenital deaf cases: A comparative study. Natl J Clin Anat 2014;3:193- 7.6. DOI: 10.4103/2277-4025.297381
18. Rastogi P, Pillai KR. A study of fingerprints in relation to gender and blood group. Journal of Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine. 2010;32(1):11-14. DOI;10.1177/0971097320100105.
19. Bhavana D, Ruchi J, Prakash T, JL K. Study of fingerprint patterns in relationship with blood group and gender-a statistical review. Arches. 2013;1(1):15-17.
20. Amit A. Mehta, Anjulika A. Mehta. STUDY OF FINGERPRINT PATTERNS AMONG MEDICAL STUDENTS IN VIDARBHA REGION, INDIA. Int J Anat Res2015;3(2):1043-1045. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2015.153.
21. Sangam MR, Krupadanam K, Anasuya K. A study of finger prints: bilateral asymmetry and sex difference in the region of Andhra Pradesh. J Clin Diagn Res. 2011;5(3):597–600.
22. Eze UO, Igbigbi PS, Nwachukwu DC. Gender prediction from the primary fingerprint pattern: a study among medical students in Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma. Biomed J             Sci   Tech             2020;28(3). DOI:10.26717/BJSTR.2020.29.004739
23. Adenowo TK, Dare BJ. Digital and Palmer Dermatoglyphic; A bio-indicator for intelligence quotient. J Basic Appl Res. 2016; 2(3): 313-9.
24. Sachan K, Malhan S, Rastogi A, Jain A. Dermatoglyphic patterns and academic performance of college students: a relationship? SALT J Sci Res Healthc. 2022 March 03; 2(1): 34-39.DOI:10.56735/saltjsrh.ms2202013439