Literature DB >> 30377790

A systematic review of the agreement between chronological age and skeletal age based on the Greulich and Pyle atlas.

Pål Skage Dahlberg1, Annhild Mosdøl2, Yunpeng Ding2, Øyvind Bleka3, Veslemøy Rolseth3, Gyri Hval Straumann2, Marianne Skjerven-Martinsen3, Gerd Jorunn Møller Delaveris3, Gunn Elisabeth Vist2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review examines the agreement between assessed skeletal age by the Greulich and Pyle atlas (GP skeletal age) and chronological age.
METHODS: We searched electronic databases until January 2017 for studies reporting GP skeletal age and confirmed chronological age in healthy individuals aged 10-25 years. Results are presented as forest plots and meta-analyses (random-effects models).
RESULTS: In separate meta-analyses for each age group and sex (14-18 years for girls, 14-19 years for boys), the pooled mean differences between GP skeletal age and chronological age varied from -0.52 years to 0.47 years. In individual studies, age group and sex-specific mean differences between GP skeletal age and chronological age rarely exceeded 1 year, but between-study heterogeneities were large in most age groups. Few studies examined mean chronological age and distribution for each GP skeletal age. One study of good methodological quality indicates that 95% prediction intervals for chronological age from given GP skeletal ages are typically around 4 years.
CONCLUSIONS: There is still good correlation between GP skeletal age and mean chronological age in modern populations. However, the individual variation of development within a population and heterogeneities between studies are substantial. KEY POINTS: • The GP atlas still corresponds well with mean chronological age in modern populations. • The substantial variation within a population must be considered. • The heterogeneity between studies is relatively large and of unknown origin.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Age determination by skeleton; Forensic sciences; Hand bones; Meta-analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30377790     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5718-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  31 in total

1.  Effects of ethnicity on skeletal maturation: consequences for forensic age estimations.

Authors:  A Schmeling; W Reisinger; D Loreck; K Vendura; W Markus; G Geserick
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Skeletal age and its prediction in Philadephia children.

Authors:  F E JOHNSTON
Journal:  Hum Biol       Date:  1963-05       Impact factor: 0.553

3.  Skeletal age determinations in children of European and African descent: applicability of the Greulich and Pyle standards.

Authors:  S Mora; M I Boechat; E Pietka; H K Huang; V Gilsanz
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.756

4.  The impact of economic progress and modernization in medicine on the ossification of hand and wrist.

Authors:  Andreas Schmeling; Ronald Schulz; Bettina Danner; Friedrich W Rösing
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2005-07-13       Impact factor: 2.686

5.  Study of age dependence of epiphyseal ossification of the hand skeleton.

Authors:  S Schmidt; U Baumann; R Schulz; W Reisinger; A Schmeling
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2007-10-05       Impact factor: 2.686

6.  Is the Greulich and Pyle atlas still valid for Dutch Caucasian children today?

Authors:  R R van Rijn; M H Lequin; S G Robben; W C Hop; C van Kuijk
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2001-10

7.  Effects of an energy and micronutrient supplement on skeletal maturation in undernourished children in Indonesia.

Authors:  A B Jahari; J Haas; M A Husaini; E Pollitt
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.016

8.  Assessment of bone ages: is the Greulich-Pyle method sufficient for Turkish boys?

Authors:  A Koc; M Karaoglanoglu; M Erdogan; M Kosecik; Y Cesur
Journal:  Pediatr Int       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.524

9.  Bone age determination in a paediatric population as an indicator of nutritional status.

Authors:  K Fleshman
Journal:  Trop Doct       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 0.731

10.  Is the assessment of bone age by the Greulich-Pyle method reliable at forensic age estimation for Turkish children?

Authors:  Bora Büken; Alp Alper Safak; Burhan Yazici; Erhan Büken; Atilla Senih Mayda
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2007-03-27       Impact factor: 2.395

View more
  5 in total

1.  Bone age for chronological age determination - statement of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology musculoskeletal task force group.

Authors:  Lil-Sofie Ording Müller; Amaka Offiah; Catherine Adamsbaum; Ignasi Barber; Pier Luigi Di Paolo; Paul Humphries; Susan Shelmerdine; Laura Tanturri De Horatio; Paolo Toma; Catherine Treguier; Karen Rosendahl
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2019-03-26

2.  Hybrid HCNN-KNN Model Enhances Age Estimation Accuracy in Orthopantomography.

Authors:  Fatemeh Sharifonnasabi; Noor Zaman Jhanjhi; Jacob John; Peyman Obeidy; Shahab S Band; Hamid Alinejad-Rokny; Mohammed Baz
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-05-30

3.  The Application of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Skeletal Age Assessment.

Authors:  Khalaf Alshamrani
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 1.781

4.  NMR-based metabolic profiling of children with premature adrenarche.

Authors:  Konstantina Matzarapi; Aristeidis Giannakopoulos; Styliani A Chasapi; Dimitra Kritikou; Alexandra Efthymiadou; Dionisios Chrysis; Georgios A Spyroulias
Journal:  Metabolomics       Date:  2022-10-14       Impact factor: 4.747

5.  Applicability of two commonly used bone age assessment methods to twenty-first century UK children.

Authors:  Khalaf Alshamrani; Amaka C Offiah
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 5.315

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.