Abstract | Keywords | Export | Availability | Bookmark

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The aim of the study was to detect which methods are used by non-forensic dentists to estimate the age of individuals from different age groups, based on panoramic radiographs. Their prediction results were compared with established gold standard age estimation outcomes. A cross-sectional study was conducted among Flemish non-forensic dentists by means of an online questionnaire. The participants were asked to estimate the age of five individuals based on their provided panoramic radiograph. The panoramic radiographs were from three age categories based on the observed dental developmental status: children (≤ 16 years), subadults (≥ 16 years ≤ 23 years) and adults (≥ 23 years). Qualtrics software was used to establish and distribute the online questionnaire. Dentists were invited to participate by phone, e-mail and social media. Microsoft Excel was used to conduct the statistical analyses. A total of 195 dentists participated the study. For the age estimation of the children, almost all participants relied on the eruption of the definitive teeth and approximately 75% obtained a point estimate lower than the gold standard point estimate. For the age estimation of the subadults, 98% of the participants relied on the eruption and/or developmental process of the third molars. More than half of the obtained point estimates were underestimations, while the mean value of all the received point estimates was an overestimation, explained by some extremely high received point estimates. The provided uncertainty intervals were variable with some very wide interval ranges up to 20,0 years. For the age estimation of the adult, the majority of the participants relied on both developmental and morphological predictors. Approximately 70% of the participants obtained a point estimate higher than the gold standard point estimate. The provided uncertainty intervals were variable among which some very wide interval widths up to 30,0 years. The application of literature-based dental age estimation methods was nearly absent. The accuracy of the received point estimates was higher than expected but decreased with increasing age of the subjects. More attention should be paid to the training of skills in performing dental age estimations in the Flemish dental education programs.