Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This paper evaluates the reliability and validity of eight published dental age estimation methods for adults that may aid in victim identification. Age was calculated on 20 Caucasian teeth of known age according to the methods of Kvaal (for in situ and extracted teeth), Solheim (for in situ and sectioned teeth), Lamendin (for extracted teeth), Johanson (for sectioned teeth) and Bang (for extracted and sectioned teeth) by one independent observer. For each method, mean age error and standard error were assessed as the measures of accuracy and precision. In addition, method simplicity, requirements for tooth preparation and the equipment necessary were assessed and recommendations given for forensic use in various situations. Methods for sectioned teeth gave more reliable results when compared to methods for intact teeth.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!