ArticleScientific reports2026
Applicability and validation of Franco, Willems and Willems II dental age estimation models in a population of Ceará, Brazil.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental age assessment plays a crucial role in clinical and forensic contexts. For safer practices, however, the existing methods need to be tested. This study aimed to evaluate for the first time the applicability of Franco's, Willems', and Willems' II dental age assessment models in a Northeastern Brazilian sample. The sample consisted of 500 panoramic radiographs (250 males, 250 females) of Brazilian individuals between 6 and 15.9 years from the State of Ceará. Chronological (CA) and estimated (EA) ages compared using mean error (ME), mean absolute error (MAE), and root mean square error (RMSE). Statistical comparisons were performed through generalized estimating equations (GEE). The mean CA of the sample was 11.0 years. The mean EA was 11.3 years for Franco's model, 11.6 for Willems', and 11.5 for Willems II. Franco's model showed the smallest bias, with ME values being 0.25 and 0.21 years lower than Willems' and Willems II, respectively (p < 0.001). Differences between CA and EA were minimal across sexes and not clinically relevant. Age-group analysis revealed similar performance up to 11.9 years. Overall, Franco's model demonstrated better error metrics, but all the models showed comparable accuracy and consistency for dental age estimation in children and adolescents from Ceará, confirming their validity and suitability for both clinical and forensic applications in this population.
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.