Basically, I am going through a couple of papers which looked at finding sexual dimorphism (mostly in dinosaurs) and instead of using a t-test or similar tool, am creating a posterior distribution for the extent of dimorphism. Although not groundbreaking (like I mentioned, it's basically those papers but using a Bayesian rather than frequentist analysis), the preliminary results are interesting because they allow me to distinguish between 'strong evidence for no dimorphism' vs. 'weak evidence for any dimorphism', which should help point the way to where further investigation may yield better results and where that effort is probably not warranted.
The papers I'm modelling this on are Hone & Mallon (2017) "Protracted Growth Impedes the Detection of Sexual Dimorphism in Non-Avian Dinosaurs" and Saitta et. al. (2020) "An Effect Size Statistical Framework for Investigating Sexual Dimorphism in Non-Avian Dinosaurs and Other Extinct Taxa". If time permits, I would like to apply this method to the data in Mallon (2017) "Recognizing Sexual Dimorphism in the Fossil Record: Lessons from Nonavian Dinosaurs" (which I believe is the paper that you were mentioning); if not, then I will probably use the Tyrannosaur growth curve data from Erickson (2004) "Gigantism and comparative life-history parameters of tyrannosaurid dinosaurs".