Analysis of interrater reliability in age assessment of minors: how does expertise influence the evaluation?

Nowadays, the clinical forensic medical management of migration flows comprises the age assessment of unaccompanied minors. The process of age estimation is a fundamental pillar for legally ensuring the minors' rights and their protection needs. The procedure is complex and involves different phases and actors, from medical doctors to law enforcement officers. The present study aimed to investigate the performance of Greulich and Pyle, Demirjian, and Mincer methods when performed by raters both trained and without training. Also, the interrater reliability within groups of raters from different areas of expertise was evaluated. A total of 36 participants were enrolled for this study, divided in two groups according to their level of experience with age estimation methods. Each rater was asked to allocate stages and standards for age assessment, evaluating ten orthopantomograms and ten hand-wrist roentgenograms. The interrater reliability expressed through the Fleiss Kappa coefficient and the agreement with the reference standard were calculated. The results showed that none of the categories analyzed could reach a good interrater reliability (ĸ > 0.8) for both methods. The study results highlighted variation and disagreement in the interpretation of the sample among raters and in the subsequent stages and standards allocation. In conclusion, the results of this study highlight that expertise does influence the reliability of the most utilized methods of age estimation of living individuals and stress the importance of proper training and practice, which could greatly increase the accuracy of age assessments.

Multi-Rater Agreement Using the Adapted Fracture Healing Scale (AFHS) for the Assessment of Tubular Bones on Conventional Radiographs: Preliminary Study.

Better understanding of the timing of fracture healing may help in cases of interpersonal violence but also of personal identification. The intra- and inter-rater agreement for the adapted fracture healing scale (AFHS) assessing the post-traumatic time interval on radiographs were tested. This is a preliminary study, providing essential information on method reliability for upcoming studies using the AFHS. Five raters (two radiologists, a forensic pathologist, an orthopedist, and an anthropologist) were presented with a test in three parts consisting of 85 radiographs (from 30 adults) of fractures of tubular bones in different stages of healing purposefully selected from more than 1500 radiographs. The raters were firstly asked to assess 15 features describing fracture healing as present, absent, or not assessable. Thereafter, the raters were asked to choose from the AFHS a single-stage best representing the observed healing pattern. The intra- and inter-rater agreement were assessed using single-rating, absolute agreement, two-way mixed-effects intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficients. The intra-rater ICC of radiologist 1 ranged from 0.80 to 0.94. The radiologists' inter-rater ICC ranged from 0.68 to 0.74, while it ranged from -0.01 to 0.90 for the other raters. The good to excellent ICC among the radiologists and forensic anthropologist provides good foundation for the use of the AFHS in forensic cases of trauma dating. The poor to good results for the other physicians indicate that using the AFHS requires training in skeletal anatomy and radiology.