MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137706857 · doi:10.3109/03014460902988702

Dental age assessment for Kuwaiti children using Demirjian's method

2009· article· en· W2137706857 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Human Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKuwait University
KeywordsHumMedicineDentistryPermanent teethSignificant differenceCrown (dentistry)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dental age can be estimated based on the level of tooth mineralization during the developmental process. Various methods of determining chronological and radiographical stages have been used for dental age estimation. AIM: To test the validity of the standards of dental maturation of Demirjian and Goldstein (Ann Hum Biol 3:411-421, 1976) when applied to Kuwaiti children. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The sample was selected from healthy Kuwaiti children attending the routine and emergency dental clinics of the Faculty of Dentistry, Kuwait University. Good quality rotational pantomographs were obtained for 509 children (263 girls and 246 boys) between 3 and 14 years. Maturation of the seven permanent teeth on the left side of the mandible was determined according to the crown and root development stages described by Demirjian et al. (Hum Biol 45:211-227, 1973). RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in the mean of dental maturation between Kuwaiti and French-Canadian children (p<0.0001). Kuwaiti children were dentally delayed compared to the Canadian standards (mean dental maturation difference of 0.69 year, SD=1.25 years, CI=0.58-0.80). The mean delay in girls was 0.67 year (SD=1.30 years, CI=0.51-0.83) and in boys it was 0.71 year (SD=1.18 years, CI=0.56-0.86). Using a non-linear regression model, function formulae were developed for Kuwaiti girls and boys. CONCLUSION: The standards of dental maturation described by Demirjian and Goldstein (1976) may not be suitable for Kuwaiti children.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.164
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it