Daniela da Costa Nóbrega Brasil, Débora Duarte Moreira, Bianca Marques Santiago, Walbert de Andrade Vieira, Oksana Avdeenko, Luiz Renato Paranhos, Ademir Franco
{"title":"Global lens of Willems' method for dental age estimation: where we are and where we are going - umbrella review.","authors":"Daniela da Costa Nóbrega Brasil, Débora Duarte Moreira, Bianca Marques Santiago, Walbert de Andrade Vieira, Oksana Avdeenko, Luiz Renato Paranhos, Ademir Franco","doi":"10.1007/s00414-025-03424-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the evidence behind the Willems method for dental age estimation and detect methodological limitations in the existing systematic reviews. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR), with the protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023487745). Seven databases, including grey literature sources, were searched (Medline/PubMed, Scopus, LILACS, SciELO, Web of Science, Open Grey and Open Access Theses and Dissertations). Systematic reviews of cross-sectional studies on the Willems method were included. Two calibrated reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, quality assessment (AMSTAR-2) and risk of bias (ROBIS). Five systematic reviews published between 2017 and 2022 were included. Combined sample sizes ranged from 9347 to 17,741 individuals aged 2.2 to 18 years. Meta-analyses reported minor overestimations in dental age, with differences varying by sex and ethnicity. However, significant methodological shortcomings were identified, such as lack of protocol registration, limited search strategies, and inadequate assessment of the risk of bias. All systematic reviews were rated as critically low quality and with a high risk of bias. The Willems method was deemed appropriate for dental age estimation by most studies, but methodological limitations of existing systematic reviews underscore the need for more rigorous research and improved standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":14071,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1183-1192"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Legal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-025-03424-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the evidence behind the Willems method for dental age estimation and detect methodological limitations in the existing systematic reviews. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR), with the protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023487745). Seven databases, including grey literature sources, were searched (Medline/PubMed, Scopus, LILACS, SciELO, Web of Science, Open Grey and Open Access Theses and Dissertations). Systematic reviews of cross-sectional studies on the Willems method were included. Two calibrated reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, quality assessment (AMSTAR-2) and risk of bias (ROBIS). Five systematic reviews published between 2017 and 2022 were included. Combined sample sizes ranged from 9347 to 17,741 individuals aged 2.2 to 18 years. Meta-analyses reported minor overestimations in dental age, with differences varying by sex and ethnicity. However, significant methodological shortcomings were identified, such as lack of protocol registration, limited search strategies, and inadequate assessment of the risk of bias. All systematic reviews were rated as critically low quality and with a high risk of bias. The Willems method was deemed appropriate for dental age estimation by most studies, but methodological limitations of existing systematic reviews underscore the need for more rigorous research and improved standards.
本综述旨在评估Willems牙龄估计方法背后的证据,并发现现有系统综述的方法学局限性。本研究遵循优先报告项目的综述(PRIOR),方案在PROSPERO (CRD42023487745)中注册。检索了包括灰色文献来源在内的7个数据库(Medline/PubMed、Scopus、LILACS、SciELO、Web of Science、Open grey and Open Access thesis and Dissertations)。包括对Willems方法横断面研究的系统综述。两名经过校准的审稿人独立进行研究选择、数据提取、质量评估(AMSTAR-2)和偏倚风险评估(ROBIS)。纳入了2017年至2022年间发表的五篇系统综述。总样本量为9347至17741人,年龄在2.2至18岁之间。荟萃分析报告了牙齿年龄的轻微高估,其差异因性别和种族而异。然而,我们发现了重大的方法学缺陷,如缺乏方案注册、有限的搜索策略和对偏倚风险的不充分评估。所有系统评价均被评为极低质量和高偏倚风险。大多数研究认为Willems方法适用于牙龄估计,但现有系统评价的方法局限性强调了更严格的研究和改进标准的必要性。
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Legal Medicine aims to improve the scientific resources used in the elucidation of crime and related forensic applications at a high level of evidential proof. The journal offers review articles tracing development in specific areas, with up-to-date analysis; original articles discussing significant recent research results; case reports describing interesting and exceptional examples; population data; letters to the editors; and technical notes, which appear in a section originally created for rapid publication of data in the dynamic field of DNA analysis.