作者： Emilie L. Smith
DOI:
关键词:
摘要: of a Master's Thesis in Human Biology at the University Indianapolis filed May 2005 Dr. Stephen P. Nawrocki, Chair Christopher W. Schmidt, Reader Jeffrey A. Dean, In forensic anthropology and dentistry, age death an unknown individual must sometimes be estimated from teeth. Various charts are utilized to subadult human remains by comparing teeth present with standardized pictures obtain target estimate. The two main used today were published Schour Massler (1944) Ubelaker (1978; 1989). Each these includes different ages very similar their illustrations, primarily because latter is derived former. purpose this study determine whether Massler’s Ubelaker’s appropriate for estimating modern children, ascertain which one more accurate, see if associated error ranges still applicable. Since regularly osteologists, it seems subject them rigorous testing known-age sample. Unfortunately, no such tests have been conducted, so fills void literature. addition, increased use DNA techniques, has become easier sex remains. Therefore, may longer justified combine males females indeed there significant differences dental development. Failure separate sexes would result greater aging errors both. Thus, secondary dividing sample increase overall accuracy charts. composed 419 European American children aged 5-15 years. These randomly selected approximately equal numbers chosen each year age. Panoramic radiographs examined assign stage formation eruption as whole. given chart particular became predicted child, was then compared known chronological summary statistics calculated chart, including mean observed range per stage. Measures (bias inaccuracy) percentage individuals correctly falling within +/-2 standard deviation interval also calculated. data evaluated using t-tests analysis covariance (ANCOVA). New 95% prediction intervals chart. This found that equally effective determining when new applied. Mean about half higher than whole years provided on both charts, meaning tend underestimate death. slightly better respect robusticity its ranges, but lower inaccuracy bias values. Not