METHODS: Visible proximal surfaces of extracted human teeth were assessed by ICDAS-II before setting them in five manikin mouth models. Then contacting proximal surfaces in mouth models were assessed by BW and CS. Histological validation with polarized-light microscopy served as a gold standard. Pairwise comparisons were performed on area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the three methods, and corrected using Bonferroni's method. Sensitivities and specificities were compared using a test of proportions and AUC values were compared using DeLong's method.
RESULTS: The CS presented significantly higher sensitivity (0.933) than ICDAS-II (0.733, P = 0.01) and BW (0.267, P
Aim: The aim of this study is to analyze predominant types of lip prints (cheiloscopy), accuracy of mandibular canine index (MCI) (odontometric), and facial index in the study population and to identify whether any correlation among the above parameters could help forensic dentistry in solving crimes.
Materials and Methods: A pilot study was conducted in 100 individuals, 50 males and 50 females aged between 20 and 25 years. For each individual, the lip prints, MCI, and facial index measurements were recorded on the same day analyzed by two observers. All the analysis was done using SPSS version 14 assessed using t-test and Chi-square test.
Results: Type II pattern of lip prints is observed as common pattern among male and female. There is no significant difference in Odontometric analysis. The mean value of facial index analysis in both genders shows highly significant.
Conclusion: A large-scale study is required in order to validate our results to arrive at definitive results and value.