MATERIALS AND METHODS: The panoramic radiographic images belonging to children with special needs from the two teaching dental hospitals in Malaysia aged between 5 and 16 years were included in the study. The evaluation was performed by two observers using three methods (London Atlas, Demirjian, and Willems methods) to estimate the accurate DA. The outcome was determined by comparing the mean of the DA and CA.
RESULTS: A total of 52 panoramic radiographs were available for the analysis. The London Atlas and Demirjian methods overestimated the DA with a mean of 0.05 and 0.20 years, respectively, while the Willems method underestimated by 0.19 years. The London Atlas method was highly precise and accurate, while Demirjian and Willems methods were the least precise and accurate.
CONCLUSION: The London Atlas method of DA estimation is highly accurate and valid for children with special needs in the Malaysian population, followed by the Willems and Demirjian methods.
METHODS: A total of 426 dental panoramic radiographs of 5-15-year-old Malaysian children were included in the study. The mean age error and absolute age error for all the methods were calculated and their usability analyzed.
RESULTS: The Nolla, Willems. and Demirjian methods overestimated the dental age with a mean of 0.97, 0.54, and 0.54 years, respectively, while the Cameriere and Haavikko methods underestimated by 0.41 and 1.31 years, respectively. The Cameriere method was highly precise and accurate in the population of Malaysian children, whereas the Haavikko and Demirjian methods were the least precise and accurate.
CONCLUSIONS: The Cameriere method of dental-age estimation is highly valid and reliable for Malaysian population, followed by the Willems and Nolla methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2306 subjects were selected from the patient archives of a large dental hospital and the chronological age for each subject was recorded. This age was assigned to each specific stage of dental development for each tooth to create a RDS. To validate this RDS, a further 484 subjects were randomly chosen from the patient archives and their dental age was assessed based on the scores from the RDS. Dental age was estimated using meta-analysis command corresponding to random effects statistical model. Chronological age (CA) and Dental Age (DA) were compared using the paired t-test.
RESULTS: The overall difference between the chronological and dental age (CA-DA) was 0.05 years (2.6 weeks) for males and 0.03 years (1.6 weeks) for females. The paired t-test indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the chronological and dental age (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The validated southern Chinese reference dataset based on dental maturation accurately estimated the chronological age.