Bias and accuracy of age estimation using developing teeth in 946 children (original) (raw)
Related papers
Controversies in age estimation from developing teeth
Annals of Human Biology, 2015
Background: Numerous dental reference data exist to estimate age from developing permanent teeth. Aim: To compare the performance of reference data that provide a point estimate using the developing second molar. Methods: Performance of several methods estimating age using mandibular second molar formation was compared using the Maber test sample (age ¼ 3-16) of 946 dental radiographs. Mean difference and mean absolute difference between dental and chronological ages were calculated. The percentage of individuals with mean absolute difference 51 year was counted across age group and tooth stage. Results for the choice of Demirjian or Moorrees tooth staging, pooled-sex, opposite sex reference data, selected stages (initial cusp tips, crown complete, root half and root complete) and statistical approaches were compared. Results: Tooth reference data conditioning on age, particularly probit mean age (ageat-transition) adapted for age prediction performed best. Results using sex-specific reference data, Moorrees stages and selected Moorrees stages were marginally better than other methods. No method performed well for ages 15 and 16 years. Conclusion: Adapted maturity data L9a and N25a reference data for this tooth performed best across age categories and tooth stages, with a mean absolute difference of 0.8 year.
Accuracy of age estimation of radiographic methods using developing teeth
Forensic Science International, 2006
Dental age estimation charts are frequently used to assess maturity and estimate age. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of estimating age of three dental development charts (Schour and Massler, Ubelaker, and the London Atlas). The test sample was skeletal remains and dental radiographs of known-age individuals (N 5 1,506, prenatal to 23.94 years). Dental age was estimated using charts of Schour and Massler, Ubelaker, and The London Atlas. Dental and chronological ages were compared using a paired ttest for the three methods. The absolute mean difference between dental and chronological age was calculated. Results show that all three methods under-estimated age but the London Atlas performed better than Schour and Massler and Ubelaker in all measures. The mean Present address of Sakher AlQahtani: College of Dentistry, King
This research tests the accuracy of two methods for age estimation, Cameriere's European formula and AlQahtani's London Atlas, on a multi-population American sample. Digitized radiographs of 360 European American, Hispanic, and American Indian children aged 6-17 years were analyzed. The accuracy of these methods was assessed using the mean and absolute mean difference of the residuals. Results indicate that Cameriere's European formula underestimated age for both sexes, with a mean difference of À1.19 years for girls and À1.32 years for boys, prompting the first author to create an American-specific formula. The London Atlas underestimated age with a mean difference of À0.18 years for girls and À0.16 years for boys. Sex and ancestry had no significant affect on accuracy. The results indicate that both methods can be used for age estimation in an American population.
The accuracy of three methods of age estimation using radiographic measurements of developing teeth
Forensic Science International, 2003
The accuracy of age estimation using three quantitative methods of developing permanent teeth was investigated. These were Mo Èrnstad et al. [Scand. J. Dent. Res. 102 (1994) 137], Liversidge and Molleson [J. For. Sci. 44 (1999) 917] and Carels et al. [J. Biol. Bucc. 19 (1991) 297]. The sample consisted of 145 white Caucasian children (75 girls, 70 boys) aged between 8 and 13 years. Tooth length and apex width of mandibular canine, premolars and ®rst and second molars were measured from orthopantomographs using a digitiser. These data were substituted into equations from the three methods and estimated age was calculated and compared to chronological age. Age was under-estimated in boys and girls using all the three methods; the mean difference between chronological and estimated ages for method I was À0.83 (standard deviation AE0.96) years for boys and À0.67 (AE0.76) years for girls; method II À0.79 (AE0.93) and À0.63 (AE0.92); method III À1.03 (AE1.48) and À1.35 (AE1.11) for boys and girls, respectively. Further analysis of age cohorts, found the most accurate method to be method I for the age group 8.00±8.99 years where age could be predicted to 0:14 AE 0:44 years (boys) and 0:10 AE 0:32 years (girls). Accuracy was greater for younger children compared to older children and this decreased with age. #
Estimation of child’s biological age based on tooth development
Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine, 2011
Dental development is relatively independent from other systems maturation. Recent studies have reported changes in the timing of tooth development for contemporary children comparing to children that lived more than 30 years ago (secular trend). Detectable variations in the tempo of tooth mineralization and duration of tooth maturation between children from different geographical regions were reported. Dental age is important not only for dental specialists, but also for pediatricians (in the evaluation of growth and development of healthy children, in pediatric endocrinology, in children with different diseases or syndromes) and forensic doctors (in order to estimate the age or to identify the child). The aim of our study was to investigate the regional characteristics of dental maturation in actual Romanian children. We conducted a cross-sectional study on a final sample of 441 radiographs of patients aged between 5.5 and 14.5 years (218 girls and 223 boys). The dental panoramic radiographs were scored by two examiners and intra-and inter-examiner calibration was made. We used a dedicated software for easy scoring, automatic dental age determination and as a database. On average, the Romanian girls showed an overestimation of 0.36 years, meaning 132 days, p=0.129, α = 0.05 and boys an underestimation of 0.04 years, meaning 15 days, p = 0.852, α = 0.05. New tables were developed in order to convert dental maturity calculated according to Demirjian method into dental age of contemporary Romanian children.
Accuracy of age estimation in children using radiograph of developing teeth
Forensic Science International, 2008
The aims of this study were: first, to determine the accuracy of the Cameriere method for assessing chronological age in children based on the relationship between age and measurement of open apices in teeth [10] and, second, to compare the accuracy of this method with the widely used Demirjian et al. method [7] and with the method proposed by Willems et al. .
Journal of South Asian Association of Pediatric Dentistry
Assessing the stages of tooth follicle growth and using the chronological developmental timeline have been the main methods for establishing dental age throughout the mixed dentition phase. These variables, which have been studied clinically and radiographically in numerous research, have been compared to known chronological ages to produce correlations that may be statistically represented to infer one or the other. Based on dental maturation, age estimation techniques for kids can be divided into two categories-scoring systems and atlas approaches. 6 IntroductIon Age estimation in young children, preteens, and adolescents is significant in forensics as well as in the planning of orthodontic therapy and clinical dentistry. Age assessment is also done on living people in medicolegal cases, including child labor, rape (both victims and accused), child marriages, and illegal immigration without appropriate approved documentation. 1 Chronological age is calculated in years for older children, whereas for younger children, it is the number of days, weeks, and months that have transpired since their birth. 2,3 The capacity to determine chronological age has grown to be an essential aspect of daily life and, more importantly, a way for impoverished children to receive aid and education. Because society and the law may incorrectly regard the person as an adult, access to resources may be restricted if documentation of age is not provided to those in positions of authority 1 ; having access to reliable and precise age estimation technologies is undoubtedly essential in cases where there is no other supporting data. 4 There are various methods for calculating chronological age, all of which depend on how a person develops throughout childhood as they mature. 5 Dental factors offer more reliable age estimation findings as compared to skeletal development estimation methods. Accurate age estimation in the preadult stage is required in judicial processes to determine the culpable age. Therefore, there is an urgent need for trustworthy methods that can confirm the assumed chronological age. 3
Accuracy of age estimation using three dental development schemas
Objectives: To compare the accuracy of The London Atlas of human tooth development and eruption and two schemas of dental development. Methods: Age of 1434 individuals was estimated using three age estimation schemas: Schour and Massler (SM), Ubelaker (Ub) and The London Atlas (LA). The sample was made up of known age-at-death skeletal remains younger than two years of age (N=112) and archived dental radiographs of individuals aged 2-23 years (N=1322). Estimated age was compared to real age using a t-test and the mean difference, standard deviation and absolute mean differences were calculated. Intra-observer variation was measured by re-assessment of 130 radiographs and calculated using Kappa. Results: Excellent reproducibility was observed for all three methods (Kappa: SM 0.838, Ub 0.857 and LA 0.879).The mean difference between estimated and real age was similar for the two older methods (SM: -0.55, 1.49 years; and Ub: -0.59, 1.49 years), both showing significant bias (P<0.001...
Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2011
Dental maturation and chronological age estimation were determined from 144 healthy Western Australian individuals aged 3.6-14.5 years. The results were compared with Farah et al.'s previous study which comprised a larger heterogeneous sample of Western Australian individuals (n = 1450). Orthopantomograms were analyzed with the application of Demirjian and Goldstein's 4-tooth method based on eight stages of dental mineralization. Analysis of variance revealed no significant differences in dental maturity scores in each age group among the males in both studies; similar results were seen in the females. Paired t-tests showed no statistical significance overall between chronological and estimated ages for the males in our sample (p = 0.181), whereas the females showed significant differences (p < 0.001). Our results show that smaller samples may be used when assessing dental maturity curves for forensic age estimation.