Forensic Age Estimation Using Dental and Radiological Parameters in Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51168/sjhrafrica.v7i3.2586Keywords:
Adolescents, Age estimation, Dental radiography, Forensic odontology, Hand-wrist radiography, Skeletal maturationAbstract
Background:
Forensic age estimation is important in clinical, legal, and identification settings, particularly during adolescence when documentary proof is incomplete, disputed, or unavailable. Dental maturation and skeletal radiological indicators are commonly used because they reflect biologic development more reliably than external physical characteristics.
Objectives:
To evaluate the performance of dental parameters, radiological parameters, and a combined dental-radiological approach for estimating chronological age in adolescents.
Methods:
This cross-sectional observational study was conducted among 50 adolescents aged 10-18 years with verified dates of birth and adequate dental and radiographic records. Chronological age was compared with age estimated from dental parameters, radiological parameters, and a combined approach using descriptive statistics, paired comparison, correlation analysis, and mean absolute error.
Results:
The mean chronological age was 14.36 ± 2.32 years. Dental parameters slightly underestimated chronological age by 0.28 ± 0.94 years, while radiological parameters slightly overestimated it by 0.15 ± 0.82 years. The combined dental-radiological method showed the best agreement with chronological age, evidenced by a mean difference of -0.03 ± 0.61 years, the strongest correlation [r = 0.944], and the lowest mean absolute error [0.52 ± 0.33 years]. Estimates within ± 1 year of chronological age were obtained in 68.0% of cases with dental assessment, 74.0% with radiological assessment, and 88.0% with the combined approach.
Conclusion:
Both dental and radiological parameters were useful for adolescent age estimation; however, the combined dental-radiological method provided the best overall accuracy, precision, and agreement with chronological age.
Recommendations:
Population-specific models integrating dental and skeletal indicators should be preferred in forensic age assessment, and multicentric validation in larger Indian adolescent samples should be undertaken before routine regional application.
References
Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM. A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol. 1973;45(2):211-27.
Willems G, Van Olmen A, Spiessens B, Carels C. Dental age estimation in Belgian children: Demirjian's technique revisited. J Forensic Sci. 2001;46(4):893-5.
Cameriere R, De Angelis D, Ferrante L, Scarpino F, Cingolani M. Age estimation in children by measurement of open apices in teeth: a European formula. Int J Legal Med. 2007;121(6):449-53. doi:10.1007/s00414-007-0179-1.
Rai B, Kaur J, Cingolani M, Ferrante L, Cameriere R. Age estimation in children by measurement of open apices in teeth: an Indian formula. Int J Legal Med. 2010;124(3):237-41. doi:10.1007/s00414-010-0427-7.
Nik-Hussein NN, Kee KM, Gan P. Validity of Demirjian and Willems methods for dental age estimation for Malaysian children aged 5-15 years old. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;204(1-3):208.e1-6. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.08.020.
Maber M, Liversidge HM, Hector MP. Accuracy of age estimation of radiographic methods using developing teeth. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;159 Suppl 1:S68-73. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.02.019.
Kullman L. Accuracy of two dental and one skeletal age estimation method in Swedish adolescents. Forensic Sci Int. 1995;75(2-3):225-36. doi:10.1016/0379-0738(95)01792-5.
Tangmose S, Thevissen P, Lynnerup N, Willems G, Boldsen J. Age estimation in the living: Transition analysis on developing third molars. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;257:512.e1-7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.07.049.
Cole TJ. The evidential value of developmental age imaging for assessing the age of majority. Ann Hum Biol. 2015;42(4):379-88. doi:10.3109/03014460.2015.1031826.
Benjavongkulchai S, Pittayapat P. Age estimation methods using hand and wrist radiographs in a group of contemporary Thais. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;287:218.e1-8. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.03.045.
Machado MA, Daruge Júnior E, Fernandes MM, Lima IFP, Cericato GO, Franco A, et al. Effectiveness of three age estimation methods based on dental and skeletal development in a sample of young Brazilians. Arch Oral Biol. 2018;85:166-171. doi:10.1016/j.archoralbio.2017.10.014.
Kumagai A, Willems G, Franco A, Thevissen P. Age estimation combining radiographic information of two dental and four skeletal predictors in children and subadults. Int J Legal Med. 2018;132(6):1769-1777. doi:10.1007/s00414-018-1910-9.
De Tobel J, Ottow C, Widek T, Klasinc I, Mörnstad H, Thevissen PW, et al. Dental and skeletal imaging in forensic age estimation: disparities in current approaches and the continuing search for optimization. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2020;24(5):510-522. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1701495.
De Donno A, Angrisani C, Mele F, Introna F, Santoro V. Dental age estimation: Demirjian's versus the other methods in different populations. A literature review. Med Sci Law. 2021;61(1 Suppl):125-129. doi:10.1177/0025802420934253.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Katkam Ramu, Dr. Zameeruddin Ahmed Hashmi, Dr. Ganja Chandra Deepak
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
