Advertisement

International Journal of Legal Medicine

, Volume 133, Issue 1, pp 217–229 | Cite as

Advancing estimation of chronological age by utilizing available evidence based on two radiographical methods

  • Øyvind BlekaEmail author
  • Torbjørn Wisløff
  • Pål Skage Dahlberg
  • Veslemøy Rolseth
  • Thore Egeland
Original Article

Abstract

This paper describes a strategy for estimating chronological age of individuals based on age indicators of X-ray of the hand and the third molar tooth. The great majority of studies in the field provide group-wise data of different formats, which makes them difficult to compare and utilize in a model. In this paper, we have provided a framework to utilize different types of data formats to build a common model for estimating chronological age. We used transition analysis to describe the relationship between the age indicators and chronological age. Further, likelihood ratio weight of evidence and posterior distribution of chronological age were used to model the distribution of chronological age given the observed age indicators. Being able to utilize such a large amount of data, with different data formats, from different studies, as presented in this paper improves previous age estimation methods.

Keywords

Age estimation Bayesian inference Likelihood ratio Demirjian’s Greulich and Pyle 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Jayakumar Jayaraman, Simon Camilleri, Rick R. van Rijn, Marco Tisè, Eugénia Cunha, and Abdul Mueed Zafar for providing data and Peter Gill for proofreading. We also want to thank the reviewers for their useful comments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

414_2018_1848_MOESM1_ESM.docx (4.2 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 4343 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    European Asylum Support Office (2013) EASO Age assessment practice in Europe. LuxemburgGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Greulich W, Pyle S (1959) Radiograph Atlas of Skeletal Development of the Hand and Wrist, 2nd edn. StanfordGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM (1973) A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol 45(2):211–227Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mincer HH, Harris EF, Berryman HE (1993) The A.B.F.O. study of third molar development and its use as an estimator of chronological age. J Forensic Sci 38(2):379–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gelbrich B, Frerking C, Weiss S, Schwerdt S, Stellzig-Eisenhauer A, Tausche E et al (2015) Combining wrist age and third molars in forensic age estimation: how to calculate the joint age estimate and its error rate in age diagnostics. Ann Hum Biol 42(4):389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Varkkola O, Ranta H, Metsäniitty M, Sajantila A (2011) Age assessment by the Greulich and Pyle method compared to other skeletal X-ray and dental methods in data from Finnish child victims of the Southeast Asian Tsunami. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 7(4):311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanbur NO, Kanlı A, Derman O, Eifan A, Ataç A (2006) The Relationships between Dental Age, Chronological Age and Bone Age in Turkish Adolescents with Constitutional Delay of Growth. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 19(8):979–985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dahlberg P, Mosdøl A, Ding KY, Bleka Ø, Rolseth V, Straumann GH et al (2017) Agreement between chronological age and bone age based on the Greulich & Pyle-atlas for age estimation: a systematic review. Folkehelseinstituttet, OsloGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rolseth V, Mosdøl A, Dahlberg PS, Ding KY, Bleka Ø, Skjerven-Martinsen M et al (2017) Demirjian’s development stages on wisdom teeth for estimation of chronological age: a systematic review. Folkehelseinstituttet, OsloGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bocquet-Appel J-P, Masset C (1982) Farewell to paleodemography. J Hum Evol 11(4):321–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boldsen JL, Milner GR, Konigsberg LW, Wood JW (2002) Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons. Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology. 73–106Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Royall RM (1997) Statistical Evidence: A Likelihood Paradigm. Hall Ca, editor. LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blume JD (2002) Likelihood methods for measuring statistical evidence. Stat Med 21(17):2563–2599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Konigsberg LW, Herrmann NP, Wescott DJ, Kimmerle EH (2008) Estimation and evidence in forensic anthropology: age-at-death. J Forensic Sci 53(3):541–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee SH, Lee JY, Park HK, Kim YK (2009) Development of third molars in Korean juveniles and adolescents. Forensic Sci Int 188(1):107–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johan NA, Khamis MF, Abdul Jamal NS, Ahmad B, Mahanani ES (2012) The variability of lower third molar development in Northeast Malaysian population with application to age estimation. J Forensic Odonto-Stomatol 30(1):45–54Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duangto P, Iamaroon A, Prasitwattanaseree S, Mahakkanukrauh P, Janhom A (2017) New models for age estimation and assessment of their accuracy using developing mandibular third molar teeth in a Thai population. Int J Legal Med 131(2):559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li G, Ren J, Zhao S, Liu Y, Li N, Wu W et al (2012) Dental age estimation from the developmental stage of the third molars in western Chinese population. Forensic Sci Int 219(1):158–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tise M, Mazzarini L, Fabrizzi G, Ferrante L, Giorgetti R, Tagliabracci A (2011) Applicability of Greulich and Pyle method for age assessment in forensic practice on an Italian sample. Int J Legal Med 125(3):411–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chaumoitre K, Saliba-Serre B, Adalian P, Signoli M, Leonetti G, Panuel M (2017) Forensic use of the Greulich and Pyle atlas: prediction intervals and relevance. Eur Radiol 27(3):1032–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Agresti A (2003) Logit models for multinomial responses. Categorical data analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p 267–313Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yee TW (2010) The VGAM Package for Categorical Data Analysis. J Stat Softw 1(10)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yee TW (2017) VGAM: Vector Generalized Linear and Additive Models. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=VGAM
  24. 24.
    Fagerland MW, Hosmer DW (2016) Tests for goodness of fit in ordinal logistic regression models. J Stat Comput Simul 86(17):3398–3418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lipsitz SR, Fitzmaurice GM, Molenberghs G (1996) Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Ordinal Response Regression Models. Appl Stat 45:175–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pulkstenis E, Robinson TJ (2004) Goodness-of-fit tests for ordinal response regression models. Stat Med 23(6):999–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aitken CGG, Taroni F (2005) The evaluation of evidence. Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. p 69–118Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Association of Forensic Science P (2009) Standards for the formulation of evaluative forensic science expert opinion. Sci Justice 49(3):161–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Spiegelhalter DJ (2004) Incorporating Bayesian Ideas into Health-Care Evaluation. Stat Sci 19(1):156–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sironi E, Gallidabino M, Weyermann C, Taroni F (2016) Probabilistic graphical models to deal with age estimation of living persons. Int J Legal Med 130(2):475–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Agresti A (2003) Random effects: generalized linear mixed models for categorical responses. Categorical data analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p 491–537Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR (2009) Fixed-effect versus random- effects models. Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. p 77–86Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forensic SciencesOslo University HospitalOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and ModellingNorwegian Institute of Public HealthOsloNorway
  3. 3.Department of Health Management and Health EconomicsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  4. 4.Norwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations