Skeletal age assessment: A comparison of 3 methods
- 31 October 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier in American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
- Vol. 130 (4) , 435.e15-435.e20
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.023
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- RUS skeletal maturity of children in BeijingAnnals of Human Biology, 2005
- TW3 bone age: RUS/CB and gender differences of percentiles for score and score incrementsAnnals of Human Biology, 2004
- Assessment of bone ages: Is the Greulich‐Pyle method sufficient for Turkish boys?Pediatrics International, 2001
- Skeletal Age Determinations in Children of European and African Descent: Applicability of the Greulich and Pyle StandardsPediatric Research, 2001
- Is the Greulich and Pyle atlas still valid for Dutch Caucasian children today?Pediatric Radiology, 2001
- Use of the New US90 Standards for TW-RUS Skeletal Maturity Scores in Youths from the Italian PopulationHormone Research in Paediatrics, 1999
- Skeletal maturity of the hand and wrist of healthy Argentinian children aged 4–12 years, assessed by the TWII methodAnnals of Human Biology, 1997
- An example of regional variation in the tempos of tooth mineralization and hand-wrist ossificationAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1992
- Bone age estimation: a comparison of methodsThe British Journal of Radiology, 1988
- Skeletal maturity in 6–16-year-old Danish children assessed by the Tanner-Whitehouse-2 methodAnnals of Human Biology, 1982