Article1994

Accuracy of age estimation from developing teeth of a population of known age (0–5.4 years)

93 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Osteoarchaeology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Dental Radiography and Imaging

Abstract

Abstract The accuracy of several methods of age estimation based on developing teeth was tested on 63 individuals of known age between 0 and 5.4 years from the Spitalfields Collection. The following methods of age estimation were tested: atlas method of Schour and Massler; diagram of Gustafson and Koch; mineralization age of some deciduous and permanent teeth, Moorrees, Fanning and Hunt, a modified method of Moorrees et al. by Smith, and quantitative methods using deciduous tooth length and weight regression equations, Deutsch, Tam and Stack. Accuracy was measured as the difference between dental age from the developing teeth and actual chronological age available from parish records. Results show that the atlas and diagram methods are considerably more accurate for this population and age group than methods based on mineralization stages of formation. Accuracy for the atlas method was 0.11 (± 0.30) year and diagram method 0.10 (± 0.37) year. The accuracy for methods based on mineralization stages of formation were considerably less accurate: 0.52 (± 0.62) year for deciduous teeth, 0.57 (± 0.42) year for permanent teeth and 0.29 (± 0.39) year for the same method but modified specifically for prediction. Significant differences (P<0.01) between dental and chronological age were apparent for methods based on mineralization stages. Accuracy of the quantitative methods during the first year of postnatal growth was high, the most accurate being deciduous molar length at 0.02 (± 0.15) year. Factors influencing accuracy and the problems encountered with the methods tested are discussed. The Schour and Massler atlas remains the recommended method of dental age estimation for this age group for reasons of accuracy and ease.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 93 citations exist upstream.

References

1973A new system of dental age assessment.1991Advances in dental anthropology 1999Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation 1980Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons 1980Recommendation for Age and Sex Diagnoses of Skeletons 1991Standards of human tooth formation and dental age assessment 1974Age estimation up to 16 years of age based on dental development.1976Age of Attainment of Mineralization Stages of the Permanent Dentition

Cited by

2018Historic Treponema pallidum genomes from Colonial Mexico retrieved from archaeological remains 2012Earliest Porotic Hyperostosis on a 1.5-Million-Year-Old Hominin, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania 2012Age estimation in children by measurement of open apices in tooth roots: Study of a Mexican sample 2012Interpreting skeletal growth in the past from a functional and physiological perspective 2012Accuracy of Three Age Estimation Methods in Children by Measurements of Developing Teeth and Carpals and Epiphyses of the Ulna and Radius

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.