Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36980350›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Age Estimation in 0-8-Year-Old Children in France: Comparison of One Skeletal and Five Dental Methods.

Laurent Martrille, Stavroula Papadodima, Cristina Venegoni, Nicolas Molinari, Daniele Gibelli, Eric Baccino, Cristina Cattaneo

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Bone age and dental age to assess criminal responsibility: Part II.International journal of legal medicine · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

7 authors.

Laurent MartrilleEDPFM, University of Montpellier, Department of Legal Medicine, CHU Montpellier, F-34000 Montpellier, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7390-8947
Stavroula PapadodimaDepartment of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, M. Asias 75, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
Cristina VenegoniLABANOF, Laboratorio di Antropologia e Odontologia Forense, Sezione di Medicina Legale, DMU-Dipartimento di Morfologia Umana e Scienze Biomediche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 37, 20133 Milano, Italy.
Nicolas MolinariIDESP, INSERM, PreMEdical INRIA, University of Montpellier, CHU Montpellier, F-34000 Montpellier, France.
Daniele GibelliLABANOF, Laboratorio di Antropologia e Odontologia Forense, Sezione di Medicina Legale, DMU-Dipartimento di Morfologia Umana e Scienze Biomediche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 37, 20133 Milano, Italy.
Eric BaccinoEDPFM, University of Montpellier, Department of Legal Medicine, CHU Montpellier, F-34000 Montpellier, France.
Cristina CattaneoLABANOF, Laboratorio di Antropologia e Odontologia Forense, Sezione di Medicina Legale, DMU-Dipartimento di Morfologia Umana e Scienze Biomediche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 37, 20133 Milano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Age estimation in juveniles is a critical procedure in judicial cases for verification of imputability or for civil reasons when adopting children. Several methods based both on skeletal and dental growth have been performed and applied on different populations; nevertheless, few articles have compared different methods in order to test their reliability in different conditions and age ranges, and this is a clear obstacle in the creation of common guidelines for age estimation in the living. A comparison of five dental methods (Anderson, Ubelaker, Schour and Massler, Gustafson and Koch, Demirjian) and one skeletal method (Greulich a Pyle atlas) was performed on a population of 94 children aged between 0 and 8 years. Results showed that, whereas under 2 years all the methods have the same inaccuracy, over 2 years the diagram methods, such as Schour and Massler and Ubelaker's revised one, have a lower error range than the most frequently used Greulich and Pyle atlas and Demirjian method. Schour and Massler, Gustafson and Koch, and Ubelaker methods showed, respectively, a mean error amounting to 0.40, 0.53, and 0.56 years versus the 0.74 and 0.88 years given by Demirjian and the Greulich and Pyle atlas. An in-depth analysis of the potential of several methods is necessary in order to reach a higher adherence of age estimation with the complexity of growth dynamics.

Indexed as

age estimationchildrendental developmentforensic anthropologypediatric populationskeletal growth

Identifiers

PMID36980350
PMCPMC10047510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read5
table measurements read5
reference markers read1
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.