Advertisement

Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 216–221 | Cite as

Is Demirjian’s original method really useful for age estimation in a forensic context?

  • José Luís Carneiro
  • Inês Morais CaldasEmail author
  • Américo Afonso
  • Hugo Filipe Violante Cardoso
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The suitability of Demirjian’s method for forensic age estimation has been systematically questioned. The aim of this study is to further assess the reliability of Demirjian’s original method in forensic age estimation using a sample of Portuguese children.

Methods

564 panoramic radiographs of Portuguese boys and girls between 6 and 16 years of age were evaluated using Demirjian’s method. Dental age (DA) was determined using the 50th percentile for the maturity score obtained for each age group. The mean difference between chronological age (CA) and dental age (DA) and the mean absolute difference between CA and DA were calculated for each age group. Paired t tests were used to test the statistical significance of mean differences between CA and DA. For each individual, a 94 % confidence interval was calculated for estimated DA, using the 3rd and 97th percentiles in Demirjian’s conversion tables.

Results

Chronological age was overestimated in boys, in every age group; mean differences between CA and DA were statistically significant, expect for age 7. In girls, chronological age was overestimated in the 10–15 year-old age group. The difference between CA and DA was highest in the 12 years olds for both sexes. The 94 % confidence intervals did not include the true chronological age in all 6, 13, and 15 year-old girls, and all 14 and 15 year-old boys. Only a small portion of the individuals in the remaining age groups had their true chronological age falling within the probable age interval.

Conclusions

Results show a systematic bias and consistent inaccuracy in estimating age from dental development using Demirjian’s original method, making this methodology unsuitable for age estimation in the study sample. These results add to published evidence which suggests that Demirjian’s method is not suitable and should be abandoned altogether for forensic age estimation purposes.

Keywords

Forensic odontology Age estimation Dental development Demirjian’s method 

References

  1. 1.
    Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM. A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol. 1973;45(2):211–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krailassiri S, Anuwongnukroh N, Dechkunakorn S. Relationships between dental calcification stages and skeletal maturity indicators in Thai individuals. Angle Orthod. 2002;72(2):155–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahin Saglam AM, Gazilerli U. The relationship between dental and skeletal maturity. J Orofac Orthop. 2002;63(6):454–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bagherpour A, Imanimoghaddam M, Bagherpour MR, Einolghozati M. Dental age assessment among Iranian children aged 6–13 years using the Demirjian method. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;197(1–3):121 e1–4.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Celikoglu M, Cantekin K, Ceylan I. Dental age assessment: the applicability of Demirjian method in eastern Turkish children. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(Suppl 1):S220–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaillet N, Willems G, Demirjian A. Dental maturity in Belgian children using Demirjian’s method and polynomial functions: new standard curves for forensic and clinical use. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2004;22(2):18–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koshy S, Tandon S. Dental age assessment: the applicability of Demirjian’s method in south Indian children. Forensic Sci Int. 1998;94(1–2):73–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee SS, Kim D, Lee S, Lee UY, Seo JS, Ahn YW, et al. Validity of Demirjian’s and modified Demirjian’s methods in age estimation for Korean juveniles and adolescents. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;211(1–3):41–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tunc ES, Koyuturk AE. Dental age assessment using Demirjian’s method on northern Turkish children. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;175(1):23–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Willems G, Van Olmen A, Spiessens B, Carels C. Dental age estimation in Belgian children: Demirjian’s technique revisited. J Forensic Sci. 2001;46(4):893–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liversidge HM. The assessment and interpretation of Demirjian, Goldstein and Tanner’s dental maturity. Ann Hum Biol. 2012;39(5):412–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Flood SJ, Mitchell WJ, Oxnard CE, Turlach BA, McGeachie J. A comparison of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age assessment. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(6):1610–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blenkin MR, Evans W. Age estimation from the teeth using a modified Demirjian system. J Forensic Sci. 2010;55(6):1504–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goya HA, Satake H, Maeda T, Tanaka S, Akimoto Y. Dental age in Japanese children using a modified Demirjian method. Pediatr Dent J. 2009;19(1):82–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Willems G. A review of the most commonly used dental age estimation techniques. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2001;19(1):9–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chaillet N, Nystrom M, Kataja M, Demirjian A. Dental maturity curves in Finnish children: Demirjian’s method revisited and polynomial functions for age estimation. J Forensic Sci. 2004;49(6):1324–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maber M, Liversidge HM, Hector MP. Accuracy of age estimation of radiographic methods using developing teeth. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;159(Suppl 1):S68–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Foti B, Lalys L, Adalian P, Giustiniani J, Maczel M, Signoli M, et al. New forensic approach to age determination in children based on tooth eruption. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;132(1):49–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gleiser I, Hunt EE Jr. The permanent mandibular first molar: its calcification, eruption and decay. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1955;13(2):253–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gustafson G, Koch G. Age estimation up to 16 years of age based on dental development. Odontol Revy. 1974;25(3):297–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Haavikko K. The formation and the alveolar and clinical eruption of the permanent teeth. An orthopantomographic study. Suom Hammaslaak Toim. 1970;66(3):103–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hagg U, Matsson L. Dental maturity as an indicator of chronological age: the accuracy and precision of three methods. Eur J Orthod. 1985;7(1):25–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Harris MJP, Nortje CJ. The mesial root of the third mandibular molar. A possible indicator of age. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 1985;2:39–43.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hunt EE Jr, Gleiser I. The estimation of age and sex of preadolescent children from bones and teeth. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1955;13(3):479–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kullman L, Johanson G, Akesson L. Root development of the lower third molar and its relation to chronological age. Swed Dent J. 1992;16(4):161–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liliequist B, Lundberg M. Skeletal and tooth development. A methodologic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn. 1971;11(2):97–112.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moorrees CF, Fanning EA, Hunt EE Jr. Age variation of formation stages for ten permanent teeth. J Dent Res. 1963;42:1490–502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nolla CM. The development of the permanent teeth. J Dent Child. 1960;27:254–66.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frucht S, Schnegelsberg C, Schulte-Monting J, Rose E, Jonas I. Dental age in southwest Germany. A radiographic study. J Orofac Orthop. 2000;61(5):318–29.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen JW, Guo J, Zhou J, Liu RK, Chen TT, Zou SJ. Assessment of dental maturity of western Chinese children using Demirjian’s method. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;197(1–3):119 e1–4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Luís Carneiro
    • 1
  • Inês Morais Caldas
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Américo Afonso
    • 2
    • 3
  • Hugo Filipe Violante Cardoso
    • 4
  1. 1.Departamento de Medicina Legal e Ciências ForensesFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Faculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  3. 3.CENCIFORCoimbraPortugal
  4. 4.Department of ArchaeologySimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations