Conditional independence assumption and appropriate number of stages in dental developmental age estimation

When estimating the age of an individual it is critical that 1) age ranges are as narrow as possible while still capturing the true age of the individual with an acceptable frequency, and 2) this frequency is known. When multiple traits are used to produce a single age estimate, the simplest practice is to assume that the traits are conditionally independent from one another given age. Unfortunately, if the traits are correlated once the effect of age is accounted for, the resulting age intervals will be too narrow. The frequency at which the age interval captures the true age of the individual will be decreased below the expected value to some unknown degree. It is therefore critical that age estimation methods that include multiple traits incorporate the possible correlations between them. Moorrees et al. (1963) [1] scores of the permanent mandibular dentition from 2607 individuals between 2 and 23 years were used to produce and cross-validate a cumulative probit model for age estimation with an optimal number of stages for each tooth. Two correction methods for covariance of development between teeth were tested: the variance-covariance matrix for a multivariate normal, and the Boldsen et al. (2002) [2] ad-hoc method. Both correction methods successfully decreased age interval error rates from 21% to 23% in the uncorrected model to the expected value of 5%. These results demonstrate both the efficacy of these correction methods and the need to move away from assuming conditional independence in multi-trait age estimation.