Evidence Hub

Assessment of Residual Skeletal and Dental Growth in Children: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Quantitative Cameriere Methods

Raffaella Grimaldi, Barbara Frenna, Giulia Perrotta, Salvatore Fiandaca, C. Satta, Stefano Cubeddu, Leonardo Catalini, R. Cameriere et al.

Children, 2026

98 participants

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Accurate assessment of biological maturation is essential in pediatric dentistry and orthodontics for optimizing treatment timing. Quantitative methods proposed by Cameriere allow continuous estimation of residual skeletal and dental growth; however, the degree of agreement between these maturation processes remains unclear. This study aimed to assess residual skeletal and dental growth in children using quantitative Cameriere methods and to evaluate the agreement between these two maturation indicators. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 98 Caucasian subjects (50 males and 48 females) aged 7.0–11.9 years. Residual skeletal growth was assessed on lateral cephalometric radiographs using the fourth cervical vertebra ratio (C4-Vba), while residual dental growth was evaluated on panoramic radiographs using the open apices method. Measurements were performed using the AgEstimation Project software v1.0. Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Correlation analysis and Bland–Altman analysis were performed to evaluate the association and agreement between skeletal and dental maturation. Results: Excellent reproducibility was observed for all measurements, with ICC values ranging from 0.93 to 1.00. Residual skeletal growth time (T_skeletal) and residual dental growth time (T_dental) showed a weak positive association (Spearman ρ = 0.18, p = 0.09). Discrepancies exceeding…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 98 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free