Heuzé, Y. and José, B. (2008). Application of non-adult Bayesian dental age assessment methods to skeletal remains:. J Archaeol Sci 35 (2). Vol 35(2), pp. 368-375.
 Title The title of the publication or report |
Application of non-adult Bayesian dental age assessment methods to skeletal remains: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Subtitle The sub title of the publication or report |
the Spitalfields collection | ||
Issue The name of the volume or issue |
J Archaeol Sci 35 (2) | ||
Series The series the publication or report is included in |
Journal of Archaeological Science | ||
Volume Volume number and part |
35 (2) | ||
Page Start/End The start and end page numbers. |
368 - 375 | ||
Biblio Note This is a Bibliographic record only. |
The ADS have no files for download on this page but further information is available online, normally as an electronic version maintained by the Publisher, or held in a larger collection such as an ADS Archive. Please refer to the DOI or URI listed in the Relations section of this record to locate the information you require. In the case of non-ADS resources, please be aware that we cannot advise further on availability. | ||
Publication Type The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book |
Journal | ||
Abstract The abstract describing the content of the publication or report |
Report on a study aimed at testing with non-adult skeletons the quality of a dental age assessment method based on Bayes' theorem. The test sample consisted of dental X-rays from sixteen individuals (range 2.6--15.1 years) recovered from the crypt of Christ Church, Spitalfields, London, for which age-at-death and sex were known. The training sample consisted of dental X-rays from 1346 girls and 1040 boys (range 1.9--16.0 years). Bayesian dental age assessment method was alternatively used with dependent and independent assumptions; the dependent Bayesian method (DBM) and independent Bayesian method (IBM), respectively. Moreover, both DBM and IBM were used alternatively with sex-specific standards and with non-sex-specific standard. Due to the training sample age distribution, both methods are efficient between 5.0 and 14.0 years. Whatever the method or the sex standard used, when dental age was different from chronological age, the discrepancy did not exceed one age group of one year. DBM produced tighter dental age 100% confidence intervals than IBM for the majority of assessments. The observed stability between results produced according to the type of sex standard used (i.e. sex-specific or non-sex-specific), and the number of teeth studied (range four to seven), is worthy of note for both archaeological and forensic contexts. | ||
Year of Publication The year the book, article or report was published |
2008 | ||
Locations Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published. |
|
||
Source Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in. |
BIAB
(The British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (BIAB))
|
||
Relations Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report |
|
||
Created Date The date the record of the pubication was first entered |
21 Jul 2008 |
