Institute of Dentistry, Bart's and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AD, England, UK.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2010 Dec;143(4):545-54. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21349.
Developing teeth are used to assess maturity and estimate age in several disciplines. The aim of the study was to determine which of the most well known dental age estimation methods was best at estimating age. The target sample of dental radiographs (N = 946, ages 3–16) was described by Maber et al. (Forensic Sci Int 159 (2006) S68–S73). Seven mandibular permanent teeth (I1–M2) were assessed, and dental age was calculated using four dental maturity scales and fifteen methods that use data for individual teeth. The mean difference between dental age and real age was calculated (bias) as well as several other measures of accuracy (mean/median absolute difference, percentage aged to within six months and to within 10% of real age). Most methods estimated age with significant bias and standard deviation of bias ranged from 0.86 to 1.03 years. Analysis by age group showed most methods over-aged younger children, and considerably under-aged older children. The method that performed best was the dental maturity scale of Willems et al. (J Forensic Sci 46 (2001) 893–895) with bias of −0.14 ± 0.86 years (N = 827), mean absolute difference of 0.66 years, 71% aged to 10% or less of age, and 49% aged to within six months. Two individual teeth, P2 and M2, estimated age with bias not significantly different to zero for most formation stages using methods based on a large reference sample (L9a Demirjian stages) and a uniform age distribution (N25a Moorrees stages). Standard deviation of bias was least for early crown stages and most for late root stages. Methods that average ages for individual teeth improve if schedules for ‘mean age entering a stage’ are adjusted for prediction. Methods that directly calculate ‘mean age within stage’ can be improved by drawing from a uniform age distribution.
发育中的牙齿常用于评估多个学科的成熟度和估计年龄。本研究旨在确定最知名的牙齿年龄估测方法中，哪种方法最能准确估计年龄。Maber 等人描述了研究的目标样本的牙片（N=946，年龄 3-16 岁）。（Forensic Sci Int 159 (2006) S68–S73）。评估了 7 颗下颌恒牙（I1-M2），并使用四个牙齿成熟度量表和 15 种使用个别牙齿数据的方法计算了牙齿年龄。计算了牙齿年龄与实际年龄之间的平均差异（偏差），以及其他几种准确性衡量标准（平均/中位数绝对差异、6 个月内年龄相同的百分比和 10%以内的实际年龄）。大多数方法的年龄估计都存在显著偏差，偏差的标准差范围为 0.86 至 1.03 年。按年龄组分析表明，大多数方法高估了年幼的儿童，而低估了年长的儿童。表现最好的方法是 Willems 等人的牙齿成熟度量表（J Forensic Sci 46 (2001) 893–895），偏差为-0.14 ± 0.86 年（N=827），平均绝对差异为 0.66 年，71%的年龄在 10%以内或更接近实际年龄，49%的年龄在 6 个月内。两颗个别牙齿，P2 和 M2，使用基于大参考样本（L9a Demirjian 阶段）和均匀年龄分布（N25a Moorrees 阶段）的方法，在大多数形成阶段的偏差接近零，没有显著差异。偏差的标准差最小的是早期牙冠阶段，最大的是晚期牙根阶段。如果调整“进入阶段的平均年龄”的时间表以进行预测，那么平均个别牙齿年龄的方法会有所改善。通过从均匀的年龄分布中提取，可以改进直接计算“阶段内平均年龄”的方法。
