Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/springer-journals/applicability-of-demirjian-s-method-for-dental-age-estimation-in-a-jk1307BE97
- Publisher
- Springer Journals
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2019 by The Author(s)
- Subject
- Dentistry; Dentistry
- eISSN
- 2056-807X
- DOI
- 10.1038/s41405-019-0015-y
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
BDJOpen www.nature.com/bdjopen ARTICLE OPEN Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group of Egyptian children 1 1 1 Amro M. Moness Ali , Wael H. Ahmed and Nagwa M. Khattab AIMS: The aims of this study were to evaluate the applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age assessment in a group of Egyptian children in Minia city and to develop an age predictive equation suitable for the studied group. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, blind, cross-sectional study, 160 dental panoramic radiographs (DPTs) were selected from 420 DPTs from healthy children aged between three and 10 years old from the archived medical files of patients attending Minia University Dental Hospital (MUDH) and evaluated to estimate dental ages. RESULTS: Age was overestimated for almost all of the studied subjects with an accuracy range from 0.18 to 1.19 years for males and from 0.08 to 0.87 years for females, with the exception of two age subgroups (9–10-year-old males and 10–11-year-old females, for which the mean difference values were −0.06 and −0.008 years, respectively). A Logistic regression was used to generate a suggested formula for dental age estimation. CONCLUSIONS: Demirjian’s method may be unsuitable for Egyptian children living in Minia city. Development of a predication equation and the introduction of adaptable conversion tables to transform the maturity score into a dental age for Egyptian children may be suitable alternatives. The validity of the newly developed prediction equation must be tested among all Egyptian children. BDJ Open (2019) 5:2 ; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-019-0015-y INTRODUCTION age (CA) of a subject indicates an advancement or delay in The ages of juveniles and adolescents can be estimated using dental maturity. skeletal and dental anthropological methods. Dental development Numerous researchers have applied this method to groups of is a helpful indicator of maturation due to its high reliability, low children in various areas worldwide, and significant differences coefficient of variation, and resistance to environmental effects. between most groups and the reference group have been Typically, dental age (DA) estimations in children are based on interpreted as either true population differences or secular trends. clinical examinations that include recordings of tooth eruption or Many authors have used these differences to justify the need for a 2,3 8–11 observations of the tooth formation stages using radiographs. population-specific DMS. Demirjian’s method applicability was The radiographic method is much more accurate than the clinical reported by many authors, revealing a considerable matter of method, because tooth emergence is a short period that is debate about its applicability to all races and different popula- 1,2,12–16 determined by the time of tooth appearance in the mouth and tion. can be altered by local factors, such as a lack of space, and systemic factors, such as the nutritional status. Several dental development determination methods using AIMS OF THE STUDY 5–7 radiographs have been described. Most of these methods are The aims of this study were as follows (Fig. S1): based on comparisons between the radiographic developmental stages of a tooth and standard charts compiled from a large To evaluate the applicability of Demirjian’s method for DA population in a well-defined geographic region. assessment in a group of Egyptian children in Minia city and One of the most widely applied methods is the Demirjian To develop an age predictive equation suitable for the studied system, which was first described in 1973 and was based on a group. sample of French-Canadian children. Demirjian’smethodis theoretically based on eight developmental stages ranging from crown and root formation to apex closure of the seven left permanent mandibular teeth. The score of each stage is SUBJECTS AND METHODS allocated, and the sum of the scores provides an evaluation of This study is a blind retrospective cross-sectional study. the subject’s dental maturity. The dental maturity score (DMS) can be converted into the DA using available tables. Then, the Sampling percentile curves from the original study are allocated, and the Dental panoramic radiographs (DPTs) from healthy children aged sum of the scores provides an evaluation of the subject’sdental between 3 and 10 years old were chosen from the archived maturity. A difference between the dental and chronological medical files of patients attending Minia University Dental Hospital Faculty of Dentistry, Pediatric and Community Dentistry Departmenty, Minia University, Minia 61111, Egypt Correspondence: Amro M. Moness Ali (amromoness@mu.edu.eg) Received: 5 December 2018 Revised: 7 February 2019 Accepted: 12 February 2019 © British Dental Association/Macmillan Publishers Limited 2019 Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group. . . A.M. Moness Ali et al. (MUDH) between February and December 2017. The DPTs were developmental stages were re-evaluated two weeks later (retest) previously taken for diagnostic purposes and were reused in this to test the inter-examiner and intra-examiner reliability. Then, the study. intra- and inter-examiner agreement was calculated. The inclusion criteria were as follows: Sample size and power analysis The required sample size was estimated using OpenEpi, Version 3, open source calculator—SSPropor based on the following The CAs of the participants were between 3 and 10 years old; formula The child’s parent(s) or caregiver contact information was Sample size n ¼½ DEFF NpðÞ 1 p =½ðd2=Z21 α=2ðÞ N 1 available to obtain a record of the child’s medical history; and Both the date of birth (DOB) and the date of the radiograph þ pðÞ 1 p (DOR) were available. In which; population size (for finite population correction factor) (N), hypothesized % frequency of outcome factor in the The exclusion criteria were subjects with population (p) was 50% ±5, confidence limits as % of 100 (absolute ± %) (d) was 5%, design effect for cluster surveys (DEFF) was 1, value of Z obtained from statistical tables corresponding to Systemic diseases or genetic disorders that would affect 95% confidence interval was 1.96 and the degree of precision (α) skeletal and dental growth; was 0.05. Localized oral pathology, anomalies or impacted teeth that would affect dental growth; Statistical testing Severe malocclusion; All data were collected, tabulated, and statistically analysed using A history of current or previous orthodontic treatment; and SPSS version 20 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. USA). Quantitative data a DPT of poor quality in which one or more targeted teeth are presented as the range, mean, and standard deviation (SD), could not be scored. and qualitative data are presented as the number (n) and percentage (%). The statistical analyses were performed using an independent samples t-test for analysis of quantitative data and a Study groups scatter plot with a regression line for the association analyses. For The selected DPTs were divided into two main groups according all tests, probability (p) was categorized as follows: to biological sex [Group A (males) and Group B (females)]. Further subgrouping was performed according to the child’s age, with the Non-significant if ≥0.05; main groups divided into seven age levels (eight subgroups) at Significant if <0.05; yearly intervals (exclusive type class interval) with at least five Highly significant if <0.01; and participants per age group. Very highly significant if <0.001. Data collection Cohen’s kappa test with a p-value < 0.05 indicating significance DPT and personal information related to the CA of each subject, was used to test the inter-examiner and intra-examiner reliability. such as the DOB and DOR, were collected from the existing records. Each DPT was assigned a code, scanned at a resolution of Ethical regulation 300 dpi in gray-scale format, and stored as a JPEG image with dimensions of 2440 × 1280 pixels (Epson scanner 1000XL, Epson Inc., USA). The CAs of the participants were calculated by Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the subtracting the DOB from the DOR and were recorded as years Faculty of Dentistry of Minia University, Egypt, on 27/2/2018 with two decimal places. and was registered under number 204. The procedures followed were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki Scoring of the radiographs of 1975 as revised in 2000. Prior to collecting DPTs, the child’s parent(s) or caregiver(s) was/were asked for written permission approving the use of All of the DPTs were scored independently and randomly the child’s radiographic and personal data. (using electronically generated random numbers) by one of the authors, who was blinded to the CA and sex of each subject. The digitized DPT was viewed on a widescreen monitor with RESULTS Microsoft Office Picture Manager 2010 (Microsoft Corp., USA); Only 169 out of a total of 420 DPTs satisfied the selection criteria when required, the DPT was magnified up to two times for of the current study; moreover, after interpretation of the selected identification of the dental development stages. DPTs, nine cases were excluded because their radiographic The DA was calculated using Demirjian’s method. All of the interpretations revealed DAs of less than 2.5 years, which was teeth in the lower left jaw (with the exception of the third outside the range of our study. Therefore, 160 DPTs were included molar) were assessed. The DA was calculated according to in the study, as shown in Table 1. the tables proposed by Demirjian et al. When a tooth on one side was missing or difficult to read, the contralateral tooth Reproducibility was assessed. A Microsoft Excel 2010 (Microsoft Corp., USA) Inter-examiner reliability was assessed by correlating the data database was used for data entry. obtained from the test and retest processes. The linear Pearson’s correlation between the test and retest resulted in P-values less than 0.001, indicating that the ratings were significantly corre- Reproducibility lated. The percentage of intra-observer agreement for 32 DPTs Twenty percent of the DPTs were randomly selected using was 89.25%, with eighteen one stage ahead and fourteen one electronically generated random numbers, and the tooth stage behind. BDJ Open (2019) 5:2 1234567890();,: Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group. . . A.M. Moness Ali et al. Table 1. Distribution of the studied children by age and biological sex Males Females Age groups Frequency Percent (%) Frequency Percent (%) 3 to <4 10 13.5 8 9.3 4 to < 10 13.5 9 10.5 5 to <6 11 14.9 15 17.4 6 to <7 5 6.8 10 11.6 7 to <8 10 13.5 10 11.6 8 to <9 10 13.5 10 11.6 9 to <10 8 10.8 12 14.0 10 to <11 10 13.5 12 14.0 Total 74 100.0 86 100.0 P-value 0.114 0.119 Fig. 1 Scatter plot showing the differences between the estimated dental ages and the chronological ages (EDA-CA) plotted against the chronological ages (CAs) with a regression line for the male Table 2. Comparisons between the estimated dental ages (EDA) and group chronological ages (CA) among the studied children using an independent samples t-test Age Gender Mean ±SD Mean P-value group difference CA EDA (EDA-CA) 3–4 Male 3.21 ± 0.35 4.40 ± 1.04 1.19 0.006 Female 3.67 ± 0.3 4.55 ± 0.79 0.87 0.017 4–5 Male 4.39 ± 0.39 4.64 ± 0.81 0.25 0.393 Female 4.08 ± 0.16 4.68 ± 0.78 0.60 0.052 5–6 Male 5.08 ± 0.27 5.99 ± 0.66 0.90 0.001 Female 5.32 ± 0.29 5.92 ± 0.83 0.60 0.018 6–7 Male 6 ± 0 6.1 ± 1.1 0.18 0.725 Female 6.42 ± 0.27 6.86 ± 0.45 0.44 0.018 7–8 Male 7.28 ± 0.32 7.86 ± 0.27 0.58 <0.001 Female 7.34 ± 0.31 7.57 ± 0.30 0.23 0.118 8–9 Male 8.35 ± 0.28 8.6 ± 0.38 0.25 0.116 Female 8.28 ± 0.33 8.36 ± 0.52 0.08 0.691 Fig. 2 Scatter plot showing the differences between the estimated 9–10 Male 9 ± 0 8.4 ± 0.39 −0.60 0.003 dental ages and chronological ages (EDA − CA) against the chronological ages (CAs) with a regression line for the female group Female 9.20 ± 0.23 9.14 ± 0.47 −0.06 0.671 10–11 Male 10.21 ± 0.25 10.7 ± 0.35 0.57 0.001 Development of a prediction equation Female 10.42 ± 0.32 10.41 ± 0.50 −0.008 0.962 Estimation of the differences between EDAs and CAs. The Total Male 6.37 ± 2.20 6.85 ± 2.05 0.466 0.192 differences between the EDAs and the CAs (EDA − CA) were Females 7.11 ± 2.21 7.44 ± 1.96 0. 325 0.313 plotted against the CAs. Each bn represents one child. The Highly significant difference, P-value <0.01 smallest values (~0) represent children whose EDAs were close to Significant difference, P-value <0.05 their CAs. For the male group, values above zero refer to children Very highly significant difference, P-value <0.001 whose EDAs are overestimated (maximum of 2.7 years), and values Non-significant difference, P-value ≥0.05 below zero refer to children whose DAs are underestimated (maximum 1.3 years). The EDA was found to overestimate age with a mean difference of 0.4662 ( ± 0.78675) years from the CA among the studied males (Fig. 1). Similar values were observed for Applicability of Demirjian’s method the female group, whose EDAs were also overestimated (max- The application of Demirjian’s method for DA estimation among imum of 1.9 years); similarly, values below zero refer to children the studied group revealed statistically significant differences whose DAs were underestimated (maximum of 1.1 years). Among among the 3–4, 5–6, 7–8, 9–10, and 10–11 age groups in males the females, the EDA was found to overestimate age with a mean and the 3–4, 5–6, and 6–7 age groups in females. In the 4–5 and difference of 0.3256 ( ± 0.6920) years from the CA (Fig. 2). 8–9 age groups, overestimation was noted in both sexes, whereas Correlation between the DMS and CA. A Logistic regression overestimation was observed in only one gender in the other analysis was performed to investigate the relationship between groups (Table 2). Because estimated dental age (EDA) could not be applied to all the DMS and the CA. The scatter plot graph showed a strong age groups within our sample, a prediction equation was positive relationship between the two measures, which was formulated. confirmed by Spearman’s correlation coefficients of 0.947 and BDJ Open (2019) 5:2 Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group. . . A.M. Moness Ali et al. Fig. 3 Regressions of the mean chronological age versus the dental maturity score for males and females 0.935 for the males and females, respectively. Logistic regression applicability of Demirjian’s method and to develop new prediction showed a significant relationship between the DMS and the CA (p equations, if needed. < 0.001) for both sexes. The slope coefficients for the DMS were In the current study, the inter- and intra-observer agreement 0.969 and 0.970 for males and females, respectively, indicating was satisfactory, denoting the reliability of radiographic inter- that the CA increased by 0.969 and 0.970 years for each extra unit pretation. In addition, statistical testing using linear regression was of DMS for males and females, respectively. The R values were conducted to modify the maturity scores generated using 0.897 and 0.874, indicating that 89.7 and 87.4% of the variation in Demirjian’s method. Logistic regression analysis may be a suitable CA for males and females, respectively, could be explained by the method when it is needed to assign a subject with a specific 10,27 logistic model containing only the DMS (Fig. 3). age. Thus, the suggested formulas for age prediction according to Intraoral radiographs are usually predisposed to image distor- the interpreted data are as follows: tion; therefore, archived DPTs were used because they were not The equation for males is: only accessible but also enabled visualization of all of the teeth together, which was the recommended method reported by DMS 4,21 CA ¼ 1= 0:083 þ 0:351 ´ 0:969 Demirjian et al. Although our sample size appears small compared to those of similar studies, a small sample size is not considered a limitation in The equation for females is: forensic scientific research. Moreover, our sample size was larger DMS or relatively equal to those of other studies. These studies CA ¼ 1= 0:083 þ 0:350 ´ 0:970 included a cross-sectional study that compared EDAs with CAs in 162 Somali and white Caucasian children residing in Sheffield. The outcomes of that study highlighted the need for population- DISCUSSION specific dental development standards for accurate assessment of Age assessment is frequently required for medical odonatological DA. Likewise, Prabhakar et al. tested the applicability of purposes to predict the optimal time for treatment and especially Demirjian’s method among 151 Indian children living in Davan- for forensic purposes. Therefore, the estimated age should be as gere. They found that the Davangere children were dentally more 7,20 accurate as possible. advanced and that Demirjian’s method was not applicable to their DA estimation is commonly used worldwide and is thought to study group. Other studies with larger sample sizes than ours, correlate with CA better than other maturity indicators of a child’s including those that surveyed older age groups, recommended development. Several methods have been introduced to creation of an adaptive tool to avoid the overestimation observed 1,3,10,31,32 estimate DA depending on either calcification (tooth develop- using Demirjian’s method. 7,20,22,23 24 ment) or eruption patterns. Relying on eruption dates Our results revealed an overestimation by 0.466 years in the when attempting to assess DA is complicated by the fact that male group, which was similar to the results obtained using similar 9 33 tooth emergence may be significantly affected by local exogenous age groups of Serbian (0.45 years), Dutch (0.4 years), and French factors, such as infection, obstruction, crowding, and premature (0.47 years) males. In addition, the currents results are in extraction of the deciduous predecessor or adjacent permanent accordance with those of studies reported for Iranian (0.34 years) 25 15 teeth. These mishaps can be avoided by interpreting radio- and southern Turkish (0.52 years) children, albeit to a lower graphic data representing the tooth development stages. intensity. In the female group, a mean difference of 0.325 years One of the most commonly used radiographic methods is the was calculated between the EDAs and CAs. Similar findings were method reported by Demirjian et al., which established a standard reported among females living in Tanta, Egypt (0.294 years) and based on a large sample that included 1446 males and 1482 Norway (0.3 years). This coherency is most likely attributed to females of French-Canadian origin. Although observer agreement the fact that Egyptians, similar to many European populations, are is usually reported when using Demirjian’s method, there is an all European-ancestry populations and share more or less the 7 37 evident tendency towards overestimation of a subject’s age, same geographical characteristics. which may be a result of ethnic differences between populations The reverse observations were reported for South Indians (3.04 27 26 and a positive secular trend over the last 50 years. The debate years in males and 2.82 years in females), Saudis living in Rayed regarding the applicability of Demirjian’s method to all races and (0.3 years for males and 0.4 years for females), Kuwaitis (0.71 1,2,12–16 38 populations. encouraged the authors to assess the years for males and 0.67 years for females), and Tunisians (from BDJ Open (2019) 5:2 Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group. . . A.M. Moness Ali et al. 0.3 to 1.32 year for males and from 0.26 to 1.37 year for females). Development of a predication equation and introduction of The differences in age estimation between our study and those of adaptable conversion tables for transformation of the maturity other studies may be related to differences in the sample size, age score into DA for Egyptian children could be a suitable groups, and studied populations. Other factors, such as socio- alternative. economic status, nutrition, and dietary habits, may also affect the The validity of the newly developed prediction equation must outcomes. be tested among all Egyptian children. The results of the current study revealed that dental maturation was more advanced in the examined males than in the studied females (mean differences between EDAs and CAs of 0.466 and 0.325 years for males and females, respectively). In addition to the ADDITIONAL INFORMATION absence of a significant difference between the male and female Supplementary information is available for this paper at https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41405-019-0015-y. groups, the sexual dimorphism of the acceleration of dental maturation estimated by Demirjian’s method differed in numerous Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. studies. Some researchers have reported acceleration of the EDA 10,32,39 in females compared to that in males. However, the EDA Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims among males could be in advance of that in females, as reported in published maps and institutional affiliations. by Duangto et al., who examined a Thai population and found mean differences of 0.11 and 0.10 years for males and females, respectively. In addition, Gungor et al. evaluated the applicability REFERENCES of Demirjian’s method for an elderly southern Turkish population 1. Nour El Deen, R. E., Alduaiji, H. M., Alajlan, G. M. & Aljabr, A. A. Development of the and reported that the mean differences between the chronolo- permanent dentition and validity of Demirjian and Goldstein method for dental gical and DAs ranged from 0.04 to 0.85 years and from 0.02 to 0.79 age estimation in sample of Saudi Arabian Children (Qassim Region). Int J. Health Sci. (Qassim) 10,21–28 (2016). years in males and females, respectively. Moreover, a cross- 2. Pratyusha, K. et al. Applicability of Demirjian’s method and modified Cameriere’s sectional study among the Malay population clearly stated that methods for dental age assessment in children. J. Clin. Diagn. Res 11, ZC40–ZC43 Demirjian’s method overestimated the age by mean differences of 21 (2017). 0.75 and 0.61 years among males and females, respectively. 3. Saade, A., Baron, P., Noujeim, Z. & Azar, D. Dental and skeletal age estimations in Although the current results and other reports have suggested lebanese children: a retrospective cross-sectional study. J. Int Soc. Prev. Com- that Demirjian’s method can be unsuitable as a forensic age munity Dent. 7,90–97 (2017). 7,23 estimation tool, Demirjian’s method is still a recommended 4. Demirjian, A., Buschang, P. H., Tanguay, R. & Patterson, D. K. Interrelationships method to assess individual dental maturity. Notably, no among measures of somatic, skeletal, dental, and sexual maturity. Am. J. Orthod. method has the ability to accurately determine the exact CA, 88, 433–438 (1985). 5. Jain, S. et al. Tooth coronal index and pulp/tooth ratio in dental age estimation because differences between the EDA and CA appear not only on digital panoramic radiographs—a comparative study. Forensic Sci. Int 277, due to the accuracy of the applied method but also due to 115–121 (2017). other factors, such as the examiners’ skills and experience, 6. Lucas, V. S., Andiappan, M., McDonald, F. & Roberts, G. Dental age estimation: a the studied sample size and distribution, developmental and test of the reliability of correctly identifying a subject over 18 years of age using environmental variability between the studied subjects them- the gold standard of chronological age as the comparator. J. Forensic Sci. 61, selves, and the methods used to analyze and interpret the 1238–1243 (2016). obtained results. 7. Jayaraman, J., Wong, H. M., King, N. M. & Roberts, G. J. The French-Canadian data Our study showed the absence of a specific trend in addition to set of Demirjian for dental age estimation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. significant differences between some of the studied age groups. J. Forensic Leg. Med 20, 373–381 (2013). 8. Kumaresan, R., Cugati, N., Chandrasekaran, B. & Karthikeyan, P. Reliability and Thus, we found that Demirjian’s original standards did not validity of five radiographic dental-age estimation methods in a population of accurately estimate the CA in our studied sample and that the Malaysian children. J. Investig. Clin. Dent. 7, 102–109 (2016). EDA generally overestimated the CA upon application of 9. Djukic, K., Zelic, K., Milenkovic, P., Nedeljkovic, N. & Djuric, M. Dental age Demirjian’s method in many populations. The authors strongly assessment validity of radiographic methods on Serbian children population. believe that each population requires its own adaptive dental Forensic Sci. Int 231, 398 e1–5 (2013). maturity score. This concept of developing a specific prediction 10. Aissaoui, A., Salem, N. H., Mougou, M., Maatouk, F. & Chadly, A. Dental age equation for each population is becoming more strongly assessment among Tunisian children using the Demirjian method. J. Forensic supported. Dent. Sci. 8,47–51 (2016). A limitation of the current study was that because our sample 11. Altunsoy, M., Nur, B. G., Akkemik, O., Ok, E. & Evcil, M. S. Applicability of the Demirjian method for dental age estimation in western Turkish children. Acta only represents Minia city, it may not represent the general Odontol. Scand. 73, 121–125 (2015). Egyptian population. Therefore, the developed prediction equa- 12. Benedicto, E. N., Azevedo, A. C. S., Michel-Crosato, E. & Biazevic, M. G. H. Validity tion requires modifications prior to application to the whole and accuracy of three radiographic dental age estimation methods in Brazilians. Egyptian population. Moreover, other limitations were the clinical Forensic Sci. Int 283, 128–135 (2017). nature of the sample, the age range of the children, three to 10 13. Macha, M. et al. Estimation of correlation between chronological age, skeletal age years, which includes very young individuals showing the earlier and dental age in children—a cross-sectional study. J. Clin. Diagn. Res 11, stages of permanent tooth development that are typically not part ZC01–ZC04 (2017). of such studies because of the ethical issues associated with 14. Jayaraman, J., Wong, H. M., King, N. M. & Roberts, G. J. Development of a radiography of children under five years; small cohort sizes; and Reference Data Set (RDS) for dental age estimation (DAE) and testing of this with a separate Validation Set (VS) in a southern Chinese population. J. Forensic Leg. the cross-sectional nature of the data, which is always a limitation Med 43,26–33 (2016). when examining growth patterns. 15. Gungor, O. E., Kale, B., Celikoglu, M., Gungor, A. Y. & Sari, Z. Validity of the Demirjian method for dental age estimation for Southern Turkish children. Niger. J. Clin. Pract. 18, 616–619 (2015). CONCLUSIONS 16. Esan, T. A., Yengopal, V. & Schepartz, L. A. The Demirjian versus the Willems Within the limitation of this study, the authors conclude the method for dental age estimation in different populations: a meta-analysis of following: published studies. PLoS One 12, e0186682 (2017). 17. Wong, H. M. et al. Northern Chinese dental ages estimated from southern Chi- Demirjian’s method and standards could be unsuitable for nese reference datasets closely correlate with chronological age. Heliyon 2, e00216 (2016). Egyptian children living in Minia city. BDJ Open (2019) 5:2 Applicability of Demirjian’s method for dental age estimation in a group. . . A.M. Moness Ali et al. 18. Bagherpour, A., Imanimoghaddam, M., Bagherpour, M. R. & Einolghozati, M. 34. Urzel, V. & Bruzek, J. Dental age assessment in children: a comparison Dental age assessment among Iranian children aged 6–13 years using the of four methods in a recent French population. J. Forensic Sci. 58, 1341–1347 Demirjian method. Forensic Sci. Int 197, 121 e1–121 e4 (2010). (2013). 19. Giraudeau, B., Higgins, J. P., Tavernier, E. & Trinquart, L. Sample size calculation for 35. Mohammed, R. B. et al. Accuracy of four dental age estimation methods in meta-epidemiological studies. Stat. Med 35, 239–250 (2016). southern Indian children. J. Clin. Diagn. Res 9, HC01–HC08 (2015). 20. Marroquin, T. Y. et al. Age estimation in adults by dental imaging assessment 36. Nykanen, R., Espeland, L., Kvaal, S. I. & Krogstad, O. Validity of the Demirjian systematic review. Forensic Sci. Int 275, 203–211 (2017). method for dental age estimation when applied to Norwegian children. Acta 21. Mani, S. A., Naing, L., John, J. & Samsudin, A. R. Comparison of two methods of Odontol. Scand. 56, 238–244 (1998). dental age estimation in 7–15-year-old Malays. Int J. Paediatr. Dent. 18, 380–388 37. El-Bakary, A. A., Hammad, S. M. & Mohammed, F. Dental age estimation in (2008). Egyptian children, comparison between two methods. J. Forensic Leg. Med 17, 22. Mohd Yusof, M. Y. P., Wan Mokhtar, I., Rajasekharan, S., Overholser, R. & Martens, 363–367 (2010). L. Performance of Willem’s dental age estimation method in children: a sys- 38. Qudeimat, M. A. & Behbehani, F. Dental age assessment for Kuwaiti children tematic review and meta-analysis. Forensic Sci. Int 280, 245 e1–45 e10 (2017). using Demirjian’s method. Ann. Hum. Biol. 36, 695–704 (2009). 23. Carneiro, J. L., Caldas, I. M., Afonso, A. & Cardoso, H. F. Is Demirjian’s original 39. Mohammed, R. B. et al. Accuracy of Demirjian’s 8 teeth method for age prediction method really useful for age estimation in a forensic context? Forensic Sci. Med in South Indian children: a comparative study. Contemp. Clin. Dent. 6,5–11 (2015). Pathol. 11, 216–221 (2015). 40. Duangto, P., Janhom, A., Prasitwattanaseree, S., Mahakkanukrauh, P. & Iamaroon, 24. Mohd Yusof, M. Y., Cauwels, R., Deschepper, E. & Martens, L. Application of third A. New prediction models for dental age estimation in Thai children and ado- molar development and eruption models in estimating dental age in Malay sub- lescents. Forensic Sci. Int 266, 583 e1–83 e5 (2016). adults. J. Forensic Leg. Med 34,40–44 (2015). 41. Quaremba, G. et al. Some inconsistencies in Demirjian’s method. Forensic Sci. Int 25. Hanisch, M., Hanisch, L., Kleinheinz, J. & Jung, S. Primary failure of eruption (PFE): 283, 190–199 (2018). a systematic review. Head. Face Med 14, 5 (2018). 42. Burt, N. M., Sauer, N. & Fenton, T. Testing the Demirjian and the international 26. Koshy, S. & Tandon, S. Dental age assessment: the applicability of Demirjian’s Demirjian dental aging methods on a mixed ancestry urban American subadult method in south Indian children. Forensic Sci. Int 94,73–85 (1998). sample from Detroit, MI. J. Forensic Sci. 56, 1296–1301 (2011). 27. Liversidge, H. M., Speechly, T. & Hector, M. P. Dental maturation in British children: are Demirjian’s standards applicable? Int J. Paediatr. Dent. 9, 263–269 (1999). 28. Flood, S. J., Mitchell, W. J., Oxnard, C. E., Turlach, B. A. & McGeachie, J. To evaluate Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons the utility of smaller sample sizes when assessing dental maturity curves for Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, forensic age estimation. J. Forensic Sci. 56, 1604–1609 (2011). adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give 29. Davidson, L. E. & Rodd, H. D. Interrelationship between dental age and chron- appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative ological age in Somali children. Community Dent. Health 18,27–30 (2001). Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party 30. Prabhakar, A. R., Panda, A. K. & Raju, O. S. Applicability of Demirjian’s method of material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless age assessment in children of Davangere. J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent. 20, indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the 54–62 (2002). article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory 31. Al-Emran, S. Dental age assessment of 8.5 to 17 Year-old Saudi children using regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly Demirjian’s method. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 9,64–71 (2008). from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons. 32. Abdrhman M., AzzawiaA. M. E. H. & Amal M., Ezzatb Dental age assessment org/licenses/by/4.0/. among a group of children in Tanta city. Tanta Dent. J. 13,89–95 (2016). 33. Leurs, I. H., Wattel, E., Aartman, I. H., Etty, E. & Prahl-Andersen, B. Dental age in © The Author(s) 2019 Dutch children. Eur. J. Orthod. 27, 309–314 (2005). BDJ Open (2019) 5:2
Journal
BDJ Open – Springer Journals
Published: Mar 21, 2019