Accuracy of estimating age from eruption levels of mandibular teeth

Abstract

Little is documented on the accu-racy of estimating age from alveolar eruption (AE) or partial eruption (PE). The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of age estimation from eruption levels. Methods tested were Gleiser and Hunt (1955), Garn et al. (1958), Ando et al. (1965), Haavikko (1970) and clinical eruption from Smith et al. (1998). The sample was 946 panoramic dental radiographs from children aged 3-16 years. Left mandibular teeth (excluding third molar) were assessed for eruption level (AE and PE) and root quarters. Methods, teeth and eruption levels were deemed to be accurate if the average difference between estimated and chronological ages was not significant to zero using a t-test (P>0.05). Results show that early erupting permanent teeth were fairly good at estimating age, although there was considerable age variation in eruption. Haavikko incisors and molars at AE and Haavikko and Smith central incisor and second molar at PE estimated age accurately. Root stage of erupting teeth estimated age more accurately than eruption level using Haavikko. These findings suggest that erupting permanent mandibular teeth can be helpful in estimating age.

Third molar eruption in orthopantomograms as a feature for forensic age assessment—a comparison study of different classification systems

“…The Willmot et al method evaluated in this study was presented in 2018 [ 13 ]. Comparable values were found for the method in terms of correlation with age and reliability.…”

“…In particular, the authors modified the reference point of stage 3. It must be noted that the definition in the 2018 paper with the wording “considerably above the alveolar bone level” is the least defined version [ 13 ]. AlQahtani et al in 2010 used the phrase “midway between the alveolar bone and the occlusal plane” [ 27 ].…”

“…However, modern reports on the evaluation of tooth eruption for age assessment also go back a long way. In 1837, a work was published by Saunders describing the suitability of tooth eruption for age assessment in young children [ 11 , 13 ].…”

“…Various methods of staging have been presented for the evaluation of the mandibular third molar’s eruption on radiographs [ 13 , 25 – 28 ]. These classifications differ in detail such as the reference points or in the attention to detail of their descriptions.…”

Age Assessment through Root Lengths of Mandibular Second and Third Permanent Molars Using Machine Learning and Artificial Neural Networks

“…Haaviko et al [ 42 ] developed an age estimation method based on the recognition of 12 radiographic stages of 4 teeth. Wilmott et al [ 43 ] employed Haaviko’s method and found that the stage wise assessment of root formation estimated age more accurately than eruption level. Maber M et al [ 38 ] stated that the second molar showed higher accuracy, while Mesotten et al [ 44 ] and Gunst K et al [ 41 ] reported third molar root formation as an appropriate indicator of age estimation [ 41 , 44 ].…”