Dental age estimation: Demirjian’s versus the other methods in different populations. A literature review

Abstract

Age estimation is an important issue in forensic anthropology and odontology, since it is applied to both the living and the dead. Studies have shown that assessing tooth development using radiological methods is a reliable way to estimate age, especially in children. Demirjian’s method is the most widely used estimation method for dental age evaluation. Over the years, many methods have been developed in order to asses which one predicts more accurately the age. In the literature, many populations were examined with these different methods and discordant results are described. This review aims to evaluate the studies in which Demirjian’s method was compared with Willems’, Cameriere’s, Nolla’s, Smith’s, Haavikko’s and Chaillet’s methods in order to estimate the most accurate dental age estimation method in different populations. Using the methodology described in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement, the authors conducted a review of existing literature using three databases: PubMed, Google Scholar and Google Scopus.

Methods for estimating biological maturation indeveloping and growing athletes: A literature review

“…Los métodos basados en la maduración dental son ampliamente utilizados en contextos clínicos, odontológicos, forenses y antropológicos (De Donno et al, 2021), siendo el más empleado el propuesto por Demirjian & Goldstein (1976), mientras que en contextos de valoración deportiva su uso está menos extendido (Albaladejo-Saura et al, 2021;Beunen et al, 2006;Johnston et al, 2018;. Este método utiliza el desarrollo dental como indicador de la maduración biológica.…”

Validity of age estimation methods and reproducibility of bone/dental maturity indices for chronological age estimation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of validation studies

“…Age estimation represents one of the most important aspects of dental/skeletal analysis and forensic anthropology, playing a key role in human identification, both in living subjects and to establish identity in human remains 1 , 2 , 29 . This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the current literature on the validity of age estimation methods and reproducibility of maturity indices, in particular those based on dental maturation.…”

“…The Haavikko method had the highest variability, with a prediction interval ranging from − 6.88 to 4.65 for males and from − 7.24 to 4.57 for females. This might be due to the variability in dental maturation among subjects of different ethnic origin 1 , since Haavikko’s method is calibrated on Finnish children, whose dental maturation seems to occur earlier 68 . Recently, Butti et al 69 and Mohammed et al 50 reached the same conclusion that Haavikko’s method is unsuitable for both Italian and Indian children.…”

“…Age estimation, an important aspect of forensics and orthodontics, is often used when chronological age cannot be determined 1 . Indeed, estimating dental age in children is useful in several situations such as orthodontic treatment planning, forensic dentistry, and other clinical scenarios 2 , 3 .…”

Demirjian method and Willems method to study the dental age of adolescents in Shanghai before and after 10 years

“…The results of different researchers estimating dental age showed that there were some differences in the dental age between different regions and even the same region. Some researchers believed that the reason may be due to other environmental factors such as socio-economic conditions, nutrition and dietary habits, and lifestyle [5,11,12]. In Wang et al [5] Demirjian method underestimated chronological age, and the Willems method underestimated chronological age overall.…”