Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33672206›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Age Estimation Using the Cameriere Methods of Open Apices: A Meta-Analysis.

Sorin Hostiuc, Ioana Diaconescu, Mugurel Constantin Rusu, Ionut Negoi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Artificial Intelligence as a Decision-Making Tool in Forensic Dentistry: A Pilot Study with I3M.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sorin HostiucDepartment of Legal Medicine and Bioethics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 042122 Bucharest, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-4130-9402
Ioana DiaconescuNational Institute of Legal Medicine, 042122 Bucharest, Romania.
Mugurel Constantin RusuDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-8723-0540
Ionut NegoiDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-6950-9599

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the actual variability of the mean difference between chronological and dental age using the Cameriere method of open apices and to test its accuracy in variable age groups.

methodWe selected studies that contained data about the mean, standard deviation, and number of cases for chronological age, dental age and gender. We used a random-effects model. Statistical significance was estimated, at a

resultsIn boys, the average difference between chronological and dental age was 0.44 (0.26-0.63) years, while in girls the average difference between chronological and dental age was 0.34 (0.19-0.49) years. In the 6-7 years age group and in the 14-15 years age group, there was a statistically significant difference between dental and chronological age. Our study shows that the Cameriere method is useful for estimating the chronological age, with errors of less than one year.

conclusionsThe Cameriere method of evaluating dental age using open apices is sufficiently accurate for forensic practice, at least in the 7-14 age-interval.

Indexed as

age estimationCamerieremeta-analysisopen apices

Identifiers

PMID33672206
PMCPMC7926662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.