SynthesisFrontiers in dental medicine2026
Dental age estimation in forensic odontology: a systematic review comparing traditional methods and artificial intelligence approaches.
Synthesis in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental age estimation is a fundamental tool in forensic odontology, with important applications in human identification and legal contexts. This systematic review evaluated the accuracy, objectivity, and reproducibility of traditional dental age estimation methods compared with artificial intelligence-based approaches. A search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science including studies published between 2015 and 2025, selecting 16 studies that analysed traditional methods, machine learning, and deep learning models. Artificial intelligence-based approaches, particularly machine learning and deep learning, demonstrated higher accuracy with lower mean absolute error (MAE) values compared with traditional methods such as Demirjian, Cameriere, and Kvaal. In addition, these models reduced intra- and inter-observer variability, improving objectivity and reproducibility. Despite these promising results, methodological heterogeneity and the need for large, well-structured datasets remain important limitations. Artificial intelligence represents a valuable and promising tool for improving dental age estimation in forensic practice.
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.