Journals / Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

A Comparison of Two Different Dental Age Estimation Methods in Turkish Children

Türk Çocuklarında İki Yöntem ile Diş Yaşı Tayininin Birbiri ile Karşılaştırılması

Pages
190–197
Publication Date
2021-05-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Chronological ages (CA) of the individuals were calculated by substracting the birth dates from the date of the panoramic x-ray was taken.DA of each child was determined by both D and H methods.Confidence intervals of 95% of the difference between DA and CA and the absolute difference are given.Regression models are formulated separately for each gender and DA method.The significance level was set to be p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Validity of dental age (DA) estimation methods are tested in different populations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: After obtaining ethical approval, panoramic radiographs of 8-14 year-old children in the archives of Department of Oral Diagnosis and Radiology were selected analyzed retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Chronological ages (CA) of the individuals were calculated by substracting the birth dates from the date of the panoramic x-ray was taken.DA of each child was determined by both D and H methods.Confidence intervals of 95% of the difference between DA and CA and the absolute difference are given.Regression models are formulated separately for each gender and DA method.The significance level was set to be p
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:dişlerden yaş tespiti · panoramik radyografi · büyüme ve gelişim

Abstract

Objective: Validity of dental age (DA) estimation methods are tested in different populations. The aim of this study is to compare the Demirjian (D) and Haavikko (H) methods in Turkish children. Methods: After obtaining ethical approval, panoramic radiographs of 8-14 year-old children in the archives of Department of Oral Diagnosis and Radiology were selected analyzed retrospectively. Chronological ages (CA) of the individuals were calculated by substracting the birth dates from the date of the panoramic x-ray was taken.DA of each child was determined by both D and H methods.Confidence intervals of 95% of the difference between DA and CA and the absolute difference are given.Regression models are formulated separately for each gender and DA method.The significance level was set to be p

Özet

Amaç: Diş yaşı (DY) tayini yöntemlerinin geçerliliği farklı popülasyonlarda test edilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı İstanbul’da yaşayan Türk çocukların DY tayininde Demirjian (D) ve Haavikko (H) yöntemlerinin karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesidir. Yöntem: Etik onayı alındıktan sonra, çalışma kapsamında İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Oral Diagnoz ve Radyoloji Anabilim Dalı arşivindeki 8-14 yaş grubu çocuklara ait panoramik radyografiler dahil edilme kriterlerine göre seçilerek retrospektif olarak incelenmiştir. Bireylerin kronolojik yaşları (KY), panoramik röntgenin alındığı tarihten doğum tarihlerinin çıkarılması ile hesaplanmıştır. Her bir çocuğun DY’si D ve H yöntemlerinin her ikisi ile de belirlenmiştir. DY ve KY arasındaki farkın ve mutlak farkın %95 düzeyinde güven aralıkları verilmiştir. Doğrusal regresyon modelleri her bir cinsiyet ve her bir DY yöntemi için ayrı ayrı oluşturulmuştur. İstatistiksel testler için anlamlılık seviyesi p

🔖

Cite This Article

KASIMOĞLU, Y., BEKTAŞ, İ., ÇİL, T., ÇENE, E., TUNA, E., ÖZCAN, İ. (2021). A Comparison of Two Different Dental Age Estimation Methods in Turkish Children. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 190–197. https://ajindex.com/articles/685937

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Patnana AK, Vabbalareddy RS, Vanga NR V. Evaluating the reliability of three different dental age estimation methods in Visakhapatnam children. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2014;7(3):186. Schour I, Hoffman MM. Experimental demonstration of the daily apposition of 16 micra of enamel and dentin in growing mammalian teeth. J Dent Res. 1935;15(3):161-162.
  2. Demirjian A, Buschang PH, Tanguay R, Patterson DK. Interrelationships among measures of somatic, skeletal, dental, and sexual maturity. Am J Orthod. 1985;88(5):433-438. Panchbhai AS. Dental radiographic indicators, a key to age estimation. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2011;40(4):199-212.
  3. Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM. A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol. 1973:211-227. Nolla CM. The development of permanent teeth. J Dent Child (Chic). 1952: 254-266.
  4. Gleiser I, Hunt EE. The estimation of age and sex of preadolescent children from bones and teeth. Am J Phys Anthr. 1955;13:479-488. Haavikko K. The formation and the alveolar and clinical eruption of the permanent teeth. An orthopantomographic study. Suom Hammaslaakariseuran toimituksia= Fin tandlakarsallskapets Forh. 1970;66(3):103. Butti AC, Clivio A, Ferraroni M, Spada E, Testa A, Salvato A. Häävikko’s method to assess dental age in Italian children. Eur J Orthod. 2008;31(2):150-155.
  5. Tunc E Sen, Koyuturk AE. Dental age assessment using Demirjian’s method on northern Turkish children. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;175(1):23-26.
  6. Koshy S, Tandon S. Dental age assessment: the applicability of Demirjian’s method in south Indian children. Forensic Sci Int. 1998;94(1-2):73-85.
  7. Loevy HT, Goldberg AF. Shifts in tooth maturation patterns in non‐French Canadian boys. Int J Paediatr Dent. 1999;9(2):105-110.
  8. Flood SJ, Franklin D, Turlach BA, McGeachie J. A comparison of Demirjian’s four dental development methods for forensic age estimation in South Australian sub-adults. J Forensic Leg Med. 2013;20(7):875-883.
  9. Eid RMR, Simi R, Friggi MNP, Fisberg M. Assessment of dental maturity of Brazilian children aged 6 to 14 years using Demirjian’s method. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2002;12(6):423-428. Al-Emran S. Dental age assessment of 8.5 to 17 Year-old Saudi children using Demirjian’s method. J Contemp Dent Pr. 2008;9(3):64-71.
  10. Celikoglu M, Cantekin K, Ceylan I. Dental age assessment: the applicability of Demirjian method in eastern Turkish children. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56:S220-S222. Lewis AB, Garn SM. The relationship between tooth formation and other maturational factors. Angle