MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396916341 · doi:10.1080/00085030.2024.2353411

Age estimation using the Demirjian method in third molars on cone beam computed tomography images

2024· article· en· W4396916341 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Feyza Akalın Kunuk, Seval Bayrak

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Society of Forensic Science Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCone beam computed tomographyComputed tomographyMolarEstimationTomographyMedicineOrthodonticsRadiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to estimate the chronologic age of individuals and whether they were aged under or over 18 years by using the Demirjian method on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. The developmental stages of the third molars in the maxilla and mandible of 445 individuals aged between 9 and 26 years were evaluated as eight stages from A to H according to the Demirjian method. The association of these eight stages with chronologic age according to the age of 18 years, which is accepted as the threshold value, and the distribution of the stages was statistically analyzed. There was no significant difference in the mean age at which developmental stages (A–H) were seen between the sexes (p > .05). Stage A was observed up to the age of 15 years in females and 14 years in males, and stage H was observed at the age of 16 at the earliest in both sexes. Stages A and B were not seen in individuals aged 18 years and over. The age of individuals and whether they are below or above 18 years can be estimated by evaluating the development of third molars according to the Demirjian method.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Society of Forensic Science JournalSame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207