A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment

:  The aim of this study was to determine the comparative accuracy of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in the Western Australian population. A sample comprising 143 individuals aged 4.6 to 14.5 years were assessed using Demirjian’s four methods for dental devel...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of forensic sciences 2011-11, Vol.56 (6), p.1610-1615
Hauptverfasser: Flood, Sara J., Mitchell, Warren J., Oxnard, Charles E., Turlach, Berwin A., McGeachie, John
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1615
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1610
container_title Journal of forensic sciences
container_volume 56
creator Flood, Sara J.
Mitchell, Warren J.
Oxnard, Charles E.
Turlach, Berwin A.
McGeachie, John
description :  The aim of this study was to determine the comparative accuracy of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in the Western Australian population. A sample comprising 143 individuals aged 4.6 to 14.5 years were assessed using Demirjian’s four methods for dental development (original 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; revised 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; 4‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, and PM1; and an alternate 4‐tooth: M2, PM2, PM1, and I1). When comparing all four methods, the 4‐tooth method overestimated age in both males and females by 0.04 and 0.25 years, respectively. The original 7‐tooth was least accurate for males, while the original 7‐tooth, the revised 7‐tooth, and the alternate 4‐tooth were unsuitable for females. Therefore, we recommend the 4‐tooth method to be used for forensic age estimation in Western Australian males and females, as it has the lowest overall mean deviation and the highest accuracy.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01883.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_901643544</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>901643544</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-615d8cb4cdcd5ca1ec68e7f195cf55f9421b21c09a96199d2f9c187851abf3d83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1uEzEUhS0EomnhFZAFi3Yzg69_ZuwFiyiQFhTaDajsLMdjwwwz42AnkL49HlKyQALhzbWvv3Os64MQBlJCXi-7EoSoCk6oKikBKAlIycr9AzQ7XjxEM0IoLQCUPEGnKXWEkAoqeIxOKEjBWS1n6HaOF2HYmNimMOLg8Ws3tLFrzXie8DLsYm6MW9Pn8t31YTPkE37vtl9Ck7APMTPRjam1eP7Z4XlKLqWJeYIeedMn9_S-nqGPyzcfFlfF6uby7WK-KixXnBUViEbaNbeNbYQ14GwlXe1BCeuF8IpTWFOwRBlVgVIN9cqCrKUAs_askewMnR98NzF827m01UObrOt7M7qwS1oRqDgTnGfy4p8kCEoUI4rWGX3-B9rlnxjzHNmPScVqBRl68TeIMgmiUoKRTMkDZWNIKTqvN7EdTLzTQPSUpe70FJmeItNTlvpXlnqfpc_uH9itB9cchb_Dy8CrA_Cj7d3dfxvrd8ubaZf1xUHfpq3bH_UmftVVzWqhb68v9ad6eaWuV9mC_QThmbmX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2381569530</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Flood, Sara J. ; Mitchell, Warren J. ; Oxnard, Charles E. ; Turlach, Berwin A. ; McGeachie, John</creator><creatorcontrib>Flood, Sara J. ; Mitchell, Warren J. ; Oxnard, Charles E. ; Turlach, Berwin A. ; McGeachie, John</creatorcontrib><description>:  The aim of this study was to determine the comparative accuracy of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in the Western Australian population. A sample comprising 143 individuals aged 4.6 to 14.5 years were assessed using Demirjian’s four methods for dental development (original 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; revised 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; 4‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, and PM1; and an alternate 4‐tooth: M2, PM2, PM1, and I1). When comparing all four methods, the 4‐tooth method overestimated age in both males and females by 0.04 and 0.25 years, respectively. The original 7‐tooth was least accurate for males, while the original 7‐tooth, the revised 7‐tooth, and the alternate 4‐tooth were unsuitable for females. Therefore, we recommend the 4‐tooth method to be used for forensic age estimation in Western Australian males and females, as it has the lowest overall mean deviation and the highest accuracy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1198</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-4029</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01883.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21854378</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JFSCAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Adolescent ; Age ; Age Determination by Teeth - methods ; Analysis of Variance ; Assessments ; Australia ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Chronology ; Comparative analysis ; Demirjian and Goldstein ; Demirjian's four methods ; dental development ; Deviation ; Estimates ; Female ; Females ; Forensic Dentistry ; Forensic engineering ; Forensic odontology ; forensic science ; Humans ; Male ; Males ; Radiography, Panoramic ; Teeth ; Tooth Calcification ; Western Australian sub-adults</subject><ispartof>Journal of forensic sciences, 2011-11, Vol.56 (6), p.1610-1615</ispartof><rights>2011 American Academy of Forensic Sciences</rights><rights>2011 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.</rights><rights>Copyright Wiley Subscription Services, Inc. Nov 2011</rights><rights>Copyright American Society for Testing and Materials Nov 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-615d8cb4cdcd5ca1ec68e7f195cf55f9421b21c09a96199d2f9c187851abf3d83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-615d8cb4cdcd5ca1ec68e7f195cf55f9421b21c09a96199d2f9c187851abf3d83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1556-4029.2011.01883.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1556-4029.2011.01883.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21854378$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Flood, Sara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, Warren J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oxnard, Charles E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turlach, Berwin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGeachie, John</creatorcontrib><title>A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment</title><title>Journal of forensic sciences</title><addtitle>J Forensic Sci</addtitle><description>:  The aim of this study was to determine the comparative accuracy of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in the Western Australian population. A sample comprising 143 individuals aged 4.6 to 14.5 years were assessed using Demirjian’s four methods for dental development (original 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; revised 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; 4‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, and PM1; and an alternate 4‐tooth: M2, PM2, PM1, and I1). When comparing all four methods, the 4‐tooth method overestimated age in both males and females by 0.04 and 0.25 years, respectively. The original 7‐tooth was least accurate for males, while the original 7‐tooth, the revised 7‐tooth, and the alternate 4‐tooth were unsuitable for females. Therefore, we recommend the 4‐tooth method to be used for forensic age estimation in Western Australian males and females, as it has the lowest overall mean deviation and the highest accuracy.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Age</subject><subject>Age Determination by Teeth - methods</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Chronology</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Demirjian and Goldstein</subject><subject>Demirjian's four methods</subject><subject>dental development</subject><subject>Deviation</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Forensic Dentistry</subject><subject>Forensic engineering</subject><subject>Forensic odontology</subject><subject>forensic science</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Males</subject><subject>Radiography, Panoramic</subject><subject>Teeth</subject><subject>Tooth Calcification</subject><subject>Western Australian sub-adults</subject><issn>0022-1198</issn><issn>1556-4029</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1uEzEUhS0EomnhFZAFi3Yzg69_ZuwFiyiQFhTaDajsLMdjwwwz42AnkL49HlKyQALhzbWvv3Os64MQBlJCXi-7EoSoCk6oKikBKAlIycr9AzQ7XjxEM0IoLQCUPEGnKXWEkAoqeIxOKEjBWS1n6HaOF2HYmNimMOLg8Ws3tLFrzXie8DLsYm6MW9Pn8t31YTPkE37vtl9Ck7APMTPRjam1eP7Z4XlKLqWJeYIeedMn9_S-nqGPyzcfFlfF6uby7WK-KixXnBUViEbaNbeNbYQ14GwlXe1BCeuF8IpTWFOwRBlVgVIN9cqCrKUAs_askewMnR98NzF827m01UObrOt7M7qwS1oRqDgTnGfy4p8kCEoUI4rWGX3-B9rlnxjzHNmPScVqBRl68TeIMgmiUoKRTMkDZWNIKTqvN7EdTLzTQPSUpe70FJmeItNTlvpXlnqfpc_uH9itB9cchb_Dy8CrA_Cj7d3dfxvrd8ubaZf1xUHfpq3bH_UmftVVzWqhb68v9ad6eaWuV9mC_QThmbmX</recordid><startdate>201111</startdate><enddate>201111</enddate><creator>Flood, Sara J.</creator><creator>Mitchell, Warren J.</creator><creator>Oxnard, Charles E.</creator><creator>Turlach, Berwin A.</creator><creator>McGeachie, John</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201111</creationdate><title>A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment</title><author>Flood, Sara J. ; Mitchell, Warren J. ; Oxnard, Charles E. ; Turlach, Berwin A. ; McGeachie, John</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-615d8cb4cdcd5ca1ec68e7f195cf55f9421b21c09a96199d2f9c187851abf3d83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Age</topic><topic>Age Determination by Teeth - methods</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Chronology</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Demirjian and Goldstein</topic><topic>Demirjian's four methods</topic><topic>dental development</topic><topic>Deviation</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Forensic Dentistry</topic><topic>Forensic engineering</topic><topic>Forensic odontology</topic><topic>forensic science</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Males</topic><topic>Radiography, Panoramic</topic><topic>Teeth</topic><topic>Tooth Calcification</topic><topic>Western Australian sub-adults</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Flood, Sara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, Warren J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oxnard, Charles E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turlach, Berwin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGeachie, John</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of forensic sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Flood, Sara J.</au><au>Mitchell, Warren J.</au><au>Oxnard, Charles E.</au><au>Turlach, Berwin A.</au><au>McGeachie, John</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment</atitle><jtitle>Journal of forensic sciences</jtitle><addtitle>J Forensic Sci</addtitle><date>2011-11</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1610</spage><epage>1615</epage><pages>1610-1615</pages><issn>0022-1198</issn><eissn>1556-4029</eissn><coden>JFSCAS</coden><abstract>:  The aim of this study was to determine the comparative accuracy of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in the Western Australian population. A sample comprising 143 individuals aged 4.6 to 14.5 years were assessed using Demirjian’s four methods for dental development (original 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; revised 7‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, PM1, C, I2, and I1; 4‐tooth: M2, M1, PM2, and PM1; and an alternate 4‐tooth: M2, PM2, PM1, and I1). When comparing all four methods, the 4‐tooth method overestimated age in both males and females by 0.04 and 0.25 years, respectively. The original 7‐tooth was least accurate for males, while the original 7‐tooth, the revised 7‐tooth, and the alternate 4‐tooth were unsuitable for females. Therefore, we recommend the 4‐tooth method to be used for forensic age estimation in Western Australian males and females, as it has the lowest overall mean deviation and the highest accuracy.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>21854378</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01883.x</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-1198
ispartof Journal of forensic sciences, 2011-11, Vol.56 (6), p.1610-1615
issn 0022-1198
1556-4029
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_901643544
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Accuracy
Adolescent
Age
Age Determination by Teeth - methods
Analysis of Variance
Assessments
Australia
Child
Child, Preschool
Chronology
Comparative analysis
Demirjian and Goldstein
Demirjian's four methods
dental development
Deviation
Estimates
Female
Females
Forensic Dentistry
Forensic engineering
Forensic odontology
forensic science
Humans
Male
Males
Radiography, Panoramic
Teeth
Tooth Calcification
Western Australian sub-adults
title A Comparison of Demirjian's Four Dental Development Methods for Forensic Age Assessment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-19T18%3A44%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Comparison%20of%20Demirjian's%20Four%20Dental%20Development%20Methods%20for%20Forensic%20Age%20Assessment&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20forensic%20sciences&rft.au=Flood,%20Sara%20J.&rft.date=2011-11&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1610&rft.epage=1615&rft.pages=1610-1615&rft.issn=0022-1198&rft.eissn=1556-4029&rft.coden=JFSCAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01883.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E901643544%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2381569530&rft_id=info:pmid/21854378&rfr_iscdi=true