ArticleBioinformation2026
Comparative evaluation of first molar odontometry and mandibular measurements technique for gender determination.
Article in Bioinformation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forensic odontology leverages durable teeth and mandibular structures to estimate sex in mass disasters and criminal investigations, yet optimal measurement approaches remain underexplored. Therefore, it is of interest to compare linear (mesiodistal, buccolingual) and diagonal (mesiobuccal-dentilingual, distobuccal-mesiolingual) odontometric dimensions of mandibular first molars and ramus morphometry on OPGs in 140 Indian adults (70 males, 70 females; 18-35 years). Males exhibited larger values across parameters; diagonal odontometry showed the highest dimorphism (9.93% ML-DB36) and accuracy (95% logistic regression) versus linear (80%, buccolingual best) and ramus measures (65.7% max, coronoid/condylar heights optimal). Diagonal measurements outperformed linear and ramus parameters, challenging traditional approaches to mandibular sex assessment. Thus, diagonal odontometry is superior (95% accuracy) for Indian populations, suggesting multimodal 3D validation for global applicability.
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.