ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2025
Forensic dental age estimation with deep learning: a modified xception model for panoramic X-Ray images.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2025. 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.
- An augmentation-enhanced transformer model for forensic identification using panoramic dental x-rays.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- A Novel Dual-Output Deep Learning Model Based on InceptionV3 for Radiographic Bone Age and Gender Assessment.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinically interpretable deep learning for pediatric dental age estimation with explainable AI.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based dental age estimation in adolescents using panoramic radiographs: a comparative study with traditional methods.Frontiers in radiology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence versus human expertise: reliability of ChatGPT and the London atlas for dental age estimation using panoramic radiographs.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to develop an improved method for forensic age estimation using deep learning models applied to orthopantomography (OPG) images, focusing on distinguishing individuals under 12 years old from those aged 12 and above.
methodsA dataset of 1941 pediatric patients aged between five and 15 years was collected from two radiology departments. The primary research question addressed the identification of the most effective deep learning model for this task. Various deep learning models including Xception, ResNet, ShuffleNet, InceptionV3, DarkNet, NasNet, DenseNet, EfficientNet, MobileNet, ResNet18, GoogleNet, SqueezeNet, and AlexNet were evaluated using traditional metrics like Classification Accuracy (CA), Sensitivity (SE), Specificity (SP), Kappa (K), Area Under the Curve (AUC), alongside a novel Polygon Area Metric (PAM) designed to handle imbalanced datasets common in forensic applications.
results"Forensic Xception" model derived from Xception outperformed others, achieving a PAM score of 0.8828. This model demonstrated superior performance in accurately classifying individuals' age groups, with high CA, SE, SP, K, AUC, and F1 Score. Notably, the introduction of the PAM metric provided a comprehensive evaluation of classifier performance.
conclusionThis study represents a significant advancement in forensic age estimation from OPG images, emphasizing the potential of deep learning models, particularly the "Forensic Xception" model, in accurately classifying individuals based on age, especially in legal contexts. This research suggests a promising avenue for further advancements in forensic dental age estimation, with future studies encouraged to explore additional datasets, refine models, and address ethical and legal considerations.
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.