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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of forensic sciences 2011-11, Vol.56 (6), p.1610-1615 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
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 & 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 |