Background. Gender identification by using skeletal identification is an important tool in forensic, medico-legal, bioarkeology, and anthropology. Traditional morphological methods depended on the anthropologist subjectivity that caused a significant difference among the observer. This study aims to develop the discriminant function for gender prediction in a Surabaya-Indonesia population age ranges 15-25-year-olds by using a panoramic radiograph. This research used 273 panoramic radiographs consisted of 129 male panoramic radiographs and 144 female panoramic radiographs. The researchers measured 11 parameters of the jaw such as two gonial angles, two mandibular ramus heights, two mandibular ramus widths, two mandibular corpus lengths, two nasal line maxilla, and anterior mandibular corpus heights. The researchers analyzed the data by using the discriminant analysis of the IBM SPSS statistic 24.Results. the result of our study shows there were significant differences in the jaw morphometry between males and females, except the mandibular ramus widths. The jaw size in males was larger than that of the female. The biggest dimorphism variables based on the Wilks lambda value were gonial angles, mandibular ramus heights, mandibular corpus lengths, and nasal lines. While the smallest dimorphism variables were mandibular ramus widths. The accuracy of discriminant analysis for each variable ranges from 47.3% to 93.8%.
Conclusion.This preliminary study in Surabaya-Indonesia population age ranges 15-25-year-olds by using panoramic radiograph shows the highest accuracy of gender prediction by using discriminant function was obtained from the combination of the nine jaw parameters.
Objectives: This research is aimed to compare the accuracy of periapical radiography in detecting periapical radiolucency with that of Cone-beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and to assess the additional information that CBCT provides.
Materials and Methods: 96 patients with a primary diagnosis of endodontic problem had been studied retrospectively. Each root was examined for the presence or absence of periapical lesions according to the Periapical Index (PAI) Score. Roots and root canals identified through perapical radiography and CBCT were recorded. Additional information from CBCT regarding effects of lesions in cortical bone and maxillary sinus was also noted. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were analyzed.
Results: The result showed that accuracy of periapical radiography as expressed by its sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.65, 0.90, 0.86, 0.75, respectively.
Conclusion: Periapical radiography has a low sensitivity in detecting periapical lesions compared to CBCT. CBCT also provides more detailed information that is useful in endodontic treatment.
Objectives: To inform and discuss the benefits and harms of low dose radiation.
Literature Review: Low dose radiation (LDR) was often used, including for services in the field of dentistry. Several studies have studied this for a long time but the results are still not conclusively agreed. Some researchers found a variety of side effects that are not beneficial to the body, but some found no association with the body damage caused by this, and even some found that LDR has beneficial effects on the body.
Conclusion: low doses of radiation cause significant changes in the body, although this condition is met with an adaptive reaction which is considered a beneficial response by the body. Therefore, no matter how small the radiation is given, it will still have an impact on the body so it is better to be wise in its use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.