Hegde Sapna, Patodia Akash, Dixit Uma
Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Pacific Dental College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Pacific Dental College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
J Forensic Leg Med. 2017 Aug;50:49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2017.07.007. Epub 2017 Jul 5.
Demirjian's method has been the most popular and extensively tested radiographic method of age estimation. More recently, Willems' method has been reported to be a better predictor of age. Nolla's and Häävikko's methods have been used to a lesser extent. Very few studies have compared all four methods in non-Indian and Indian populations. Most Indian research is limited by inadequate sample sizes, age structures and grouping and different approaches to statistical analysis.
The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the validity of the Demirjian, Willems, Nolla and Häävikko methods in determination of chronological age of 5 to 15 year-old Indian children.
In this cross-sectional observational study, four methods were compared for validity in estimating the age of 1200 Indian children aged 5-15 years.
Demirjian's method overestimated age by +0.24 ± 0.80, +0.11 ± 0.81 and +0.19 ± 0.80 years in boys, girls and the total sample, respectively. With Willems' method, overestimations of +0.09 ± 0.80, +0.08 ± 0.80 and +0.09 ± 0.80 years were obtained in boys, girls and the total sample, respectively. Nolla's method underestimated age by -0.13 ± 0.80, -0.30 ± 0.82 and -0.20 ± 0.81 years in boys, girls and the total sample, respectively. Häävikko's method underestimated age by -0.17 ± 0.80, -0.29 ± 0.83 and -0.22 ± 0.82 years in boys, girls and the total sample, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed between dental and chronological ages with all methods (p < 0.001). Significant gender-based differences were observed with all methods except Willems' (p < 0.05). Gender-specific regression formulae were derived for all methods.
Willems' method most accurately estimated age, followed by Demirjian's, Nolla's and Häävikko's methods. All four methods could be applicable for estimating age in the present population, mean prediction errors being lower than 0.30 years (3.6 months).
德米尔坚方法一直是最流行且经过广泛测试的年龄估计放射学方法。最近,有报道称威廉姆斯方法能更好地预测年龄。诺拉方法和哈维科方法的使用程度较低。极少有研究在非印度人群和印度人群中对这四种方法进行比较。大多数印度研究因样本量不足、年龄结构和分组以及统计分析方法不同而受到限制。
本研究旨在评估和比较德米尔坚、威廉姆斯、诺拉和哈维科方法在确定5至15岁印度儿童实际年龄方面的有效性。
在这项横断面观察性研究中,比较了四种方法在估计1200名5至15岁印度儿童年龄方面的有效性。
德米尔坚方法在男孩、女孩和总样本中分别高估年龄0.24±0.80岁、0.11±0.81岁和0.19±0.80岁。使用威廉姆斯方法时,男孩、女孩和总样本分别高估年龄0.09±0.80岁、0.08±0.80岁和0.09±0.80岁。诺拉方法在男孩、女孩和总样本中分别低估年龄0.13±0.80岁、0.30±0.82岁和0.20±0.81岁。哈维科方法在男孩、女孩和总样本中分别低估年龄0.17±0.80岁、0.29±0.83岁和0.22±0.82岁。所有方法得出的牙齿年龄和实际年龄之间均存在统计学显著差异(p<0.001)。除威廉姆斯方法外,所有方法均观察到显著的性别差异(p<0.05)。为所有方法推导了特定性别的回归公式。
威廉姆斯方法估计年龄最准确,其次是德米尔坚方法、诺拉方法和哈维科方法。所有这四种方法都可用于估计当前人群的年龄,平均预测误差低于0.30岁(3.6个月)。