ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2022
Population-specific age estimation in Black Americans and Chinese people based on pulp chamber volume of first molars from cone beam computed tomography.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-view deep fusion for forensic dental age estimation in tomographic imaging.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Silent Witnesses: Exploring the Impact of Cone Beam Computed Tomography on Forensic Investigations.Cureus · 2025Review
- Machine learning assisted 5-part tooth segmentation method for CBCT-based dental age estimation in adults.The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2024Article
- Dental age assessment in the living: a comparison of two common stage classifications for assessing radiographic visibility of the root canals in mandibular third molars.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Validation of data mining models by comparing with conventional methods for dental age estimation in Korean juveniles and young adults.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo validate the fitness of the age estimation model in Black Americans, which was previously and solely established for the Chinese population based on pulp chamber volume of the first molars from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), and to establish a new age estimation model for Black Americans. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 203 subjects with CBCT scans, including 119 Chinese and 84 Black Americans, were retrospectively identified. The age range of subjects was between 11 and 87 years. For both populations, automated 3D pulp chamber segmentation of the first molars was performed by deep learning, followed by volume calculation and age estimation by a logarithmic regression model, which was established in a prior study solely on Chinese population. Additionally, a separate logarithmic regression analysis was carried out on Black Americans. The performance of age estimation was assessed by the mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), Wilcoxon signed rank test, and coefficient of determination (R
resultsWhen applying the age estimation model established in the prior study, MAE = 7.994 years and RMSE = 10.065 years were observed in the Chinese population, while MAE = 14.049 years and RMSE = 17.866 years were observed in Black Americans. The new age estimation model established for Black Americans was AGE = 89.752 - 21.176 × lnV (V = pulp chamber volume), with MAE = 7.930 years, RMSE = 10.664 years, and coefficient of determination (R
conclusionsPopulation-specific age estimation is needed when applied in Black Americans and Chinese people based on pulp chamber volume of the first molars from CBCT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.