ABFO Certification Examination: Dental Evidence and Forensic Decisions Study Guide

Apply it

A recovered jaw has a gold crown, and a missing person's chart records one. Treat this as a reason to obtain the underlying radiographs, then compare crown configuration, roots and adjacent structures before drawing an identity conclusion.

Apply it

An old chart lists a tooth that is absent postmortem. Compare record dates, inspect the socket and request later treatment records to distinguish subsequent extraction from traumatic loss or an unresolved identity conflict in this case.

Apply it

Investigators offer a missing person's stored biopsy and a sister's cheek swab. Identify the biopsy as a potential direct reference, subject to provenance verification, and the sister's sample as a kinship reference requiring relationship information.

Apply it

Two volunteers describe themselves as the missing person's brothers, but one is a stepbrother without a biological relationship. Clarify and document the pedigree before submitting either sample for a proposed missing-person kinship analysis at the laboratory.

Apply it

Before reviewing a person of interest's cast, document visible injury features and whether meaningful interpretation is possible. Preserve the initial assessment before an authorized comparison introduces person-specific information.

Apply it

A responder sees a tooth beside two sets of fragmented remains. Document its location and arrange separate recovery through the scene team, preserving the spatial record rather than placing it into either remains container immediately.

Apply it

A dental fragment moves from the scene to a morgue and then a DNA laboratory. Record each transfer against the same item identifier, including receiving personnel and seal condition, so its route remains reviewable later.

Apply it

A saliva-bearing swab arrives visibly wet after collection. Arrange controlled air drying and suitable separate packaging under the laboratory protocol, documenting the condition and avoiding prolonged sealed storage at room temperature while the swab remains damp.

Apply it

Two teeth recovered at different locations are intended for DNA testing. Use separate labeled packages and appropriate clean handling for each tooth, retaining their individual recovery records rather than combining them because they look anatomically similar.

Apply it

A courier delay leaves biological evidence awaiting overnight transport. Confirm suitable interim storage with the receiving laboratory, document the delay and conditions, and preserve item identifiers and transfer records during the revised delivery arrangement for the shipment.

Apply it

A laboratory removes part of a recovered tooth for DNA analysis. Link the powder or extracted material to the tooth's identifier and sampled region, and record the remaining tooth's condition before another examiner receives it.

Apply it

A draft report states only that two dental records match. Revise it to identify the compared images, describe corresponding features and differences, explain temporal changes and state the conclusion with its evidentiary limits for independent review.

Apply it

An ISO/FDI chart records 16 with a crown. Enter this as Universal 3, permanent maxillary right first molar. Universal 16 instead means the permanent maxillary left third molar, ISO/FDI 28. Writing both the convention and anatomical description prevents a false discrepancy.

Apply it

An antemortem image shows a small restoration, while the corresponding postmortem tooth has a crown. Seek intervening treatment information and compare unchanged root features before deciding whether the difference is compatible with subsequent dental care.

Apply it

Several diagnostic images show corresponding complex endodontic configurations, root shapes and restoration contours. After verifying record attribution and resolving a later crown placement, assess the combined correspondence and absence of irreconcilable differences rather than counting features alone.

Apply it

One legible image provides limited compatible features but lacks enough detail for a positive conclusion. Contrast that case with an unreadable chart and no comparable images, where meaningful comparative evidence is absent rather than merely limited.

Apply it

A verified earlier radiograph documents extraction of a permanent tooth, but the postmortem jaw contains that intact natural tooth in the confirmed position. Recheck attribution and numbering; if both remain secure, treat the contradiction as exclusionary.

Apply it

A damaged jaw requires access for imaging and possible DNA sampling. Photograph and chart the original arrangement, obtain authorized access and coordinate sampling so neither the comparative dental record nor the remaining specimen is unnecessarily compromised.

Apply it

A dental team receives possible names while postmortem charting continues. Route family records through antemortem collection and maintain independent postmortem identifiers, allowing the reconciliation process to evaluate correspondence without prematurely labeling remains with a proposed identity.

Apply it

A body carries a named wallet but has usable dental structures and fingerprints. Preserve the wallet association as supporting information while arranging primary identification comparisons, rather than accepting the property label as the final identity decision.

Apply it

An aircraft strikes an occupied public area. Use the passenger manifest for the aircraft population while establishing a broader missing-person process for people on the ground, preserving the possibility that some remains belong outside the manifest.

Apply it

Several jaw fragments are recovered from one small area. Assign and retain the incident's required identifiers, record positions and package appropriately, then seek anatomical or laboratory support before consolidating them as parts of one individual.

Apply it

Dental comparison favors one missing person, but a laboratory result appears inconsistent. Hold the proposed identification for structured review of records, sample provenance and interpretation instead of releasing remains while the unexplained contradiction is still present.

Apply it

After an extended shift, an examiner notices repeated transcription mistakes. Notify the team lead, arrange a checked handover and review affected entries before further comparisons use them, while adjusting workload and rest arrangements for the team.

Apply it

A photograph shows an incomplete oval bruise without clear tooth impressions. Record the visible pattern, evaluate plausible alternatives and image limitations, and avoid progressing directly to a person's dentition merely because an investigator proposes a bite.

Apply it

A curved forearm injury is documented only in an oblique phone image. Obtain authorized contextual and close views with appropriate scale placement and camera orientation, recording the arm position so later reviewers understand the acquisition conditions.

Apply it

A second authorized examination shows broader bruising than the first photograph. Preserve both series with timing and positioning information, then describe the change without assuming the later outline more accurately records the dimensions of a dentition.

Apply it

An examiner proposes stretching an injury image until it aligns with a cast. Reject that as a basis for attribution because the required transformation is unknown and may manufacture correspondence rather than recover original tooth geometry.

Apply it

For a suspected forearm bite, first record location and orientation, then coordinate authorized swabbing and detailed photography without unnecessarily delaying biological collection. Distinguish the injury sample from the injured person's reference sample and preserve their separate identities.

Apply it

Interpretable compatible features without unexplained discrepancies meet ABFO's stated non-exclusion criteria. Blurred images that do not permit assessment of those features warrant an inconclusive comparison, even when no contradiction can be demonstrated.

Apply it

A caregiver attributes an infant's oral injury to running into furniture, but the infant cannot stand or walk. Document the developmental mismatch and initiate the appropriate medical and safeguarding assessment rather than accepting the mechanism at face value.

Apply it

A walking toddler has a witnessed fall and a frenulum tear; a nonmobile infant has the same finding without a plausible event. Assess each context separately, recognizing why the second presentation warrants greater concern and coordinated evaluation.

Apply it

A child has painful untreated caries, and the caregiver reports repeated transport failures. Address pain and explain needed care, document barriers and offer workable assistance before interpreting continued nonattendance in the context of access and understanding.

Apply it

A child spontaneously says an adult struck their mouth while the caregiver describes a fall. Record each account with its source and document the examination objectively, then coordinate safeguarding without trying to resolve the disclosure through repeated questioning.

Apply it

A dentist observes injuries and a history that meet the local reporting threshold, although the caregiver denies harm. Provide necessary care and report through the mandated route without waiting for an admission or a definitive forensic diagnosis.

Apply it

A child presents with oral bleeding, bruising and an inconsistent history. Arrange appropriate medical evaluation for injury and possible bleeding causes while initiating the safeguarding response indicated by the history and findings, rather than waiting for one process to finish.

Apply it

On a fragment containing posterior maxillary teeth, identify the sinus floor and root relationships before orientation and comparison. During authorized access planning, recognize that a cut through the tooth-bearing alveolar process can destroy root anatomy needed for identification.

Apply it

A child has retained primary molars and erupted permanent incisors. Record mixed dentition and assess successors where clinically indicated, rather than classifying the primary molars as permanent teeth or assuming absent eruption means congenital absence.

Apply it

One maxillary permanent incisor remains unerupted while its counterpart has emerged. Evaluate the eruption path and indicated images for obstruction, including a possible mesiodens, rather than assuming the unerupted tooth is congenitally absent from the dentition.

Apply it

A primary molar sits below neighboring occlusal surfaces as adjacent teeth continue developing. Assess for ankylosis, successor position and space effects rather than using its low position alone to infer an unusually young dental age.

Apply it

A mature tooth has a small pulp space but a preserved external root contour. This supports deposition as a consideration rather than external root loss. A separate tooth with an irregular shortened root requires assessment for resorption, fracture and other causes of missing structure.

Apply it

Record bilateral incisor shoveling and an accessory Carabelli cusp as morphological observations. Consider wear or restoration that obscures expression, then use the findings with suitable comparative records rather than identifying ancestry or a person from one trait.

Apply it

An experienced odontologist offers an opinion from a poorly documented comparison. Assess the available data, method and case-specific application separately from professional credentials when preparing the admissibility explanation for a U.S. federal proceeding involving that opinion.

Apply it

A report describes compatible injury features but concludes that one person uniquely caused them. Examine whether the method supports that inferential step and revise the opinion to reflect the evidence and demonstrated limits of the analysis.

Apply it

Counsel asks an examiner to omit an unexplained dental discrepancy from a report. Retain and investigate the discrepancy, explain its significance and report the defensible conclusion even if it reduces the usefulness of the opinion to that party.

Apply it

A case requires a complex kinship calculation beyond the odontologist's expertise. Provide the dental findings and properly documented samples, then obtain laboratory interpretation from a qualified specialist rather than independently assigning a relationship probability to the family.

Apply it

A lecturer wants to use a distinctive case image from an ongoing investigation. Confirm permission and applicable restrictions before use, considering whether the image itself could identify the person despite removal of names and case numbers.

Apply it

An examiner discovers that one comparison image was assigned to the wrong patient. Secure the records, reassess the affected conclusion and issue a traceable correction to the authorized recipients, explaining whether the original opinion remains supportable.

Apply it

A root appears shorter postmortem than in the antemortem image, while adjacent structures show altered overlap. Evaluate projection and obtain a more comparable view before treating the apparent length difference as a genuine anatomical contradiction.

Apply it

Postmortem images show restorations clearly but truncate the apices that are distinctive in the antemortem records. Obtain suitable additional views when authorized and feasible so the decisive root features can be assessed rather than guessed.

Apply it

A tooth photograph includes a ruler standing well in front of the tooth. Retake the image with appropriate plane alignment and orientation before measuring crown dimensions, rather than treating the visible ruler as sufficient calibration.

Apply it

An examiner increases contrast to inspect a faint restoration margin. Retain the original file, document the adjustment and compare both views before relying on the margin, especially if stronger processing changes its apparent shape or extent.

Apply it

A laboratory proposes sectioning a small tooth fragment to examine internal features. Clarify the analytical question, document the intact specimen and coordinate other testing before authorizing preparation that could consume the only material available for comparison.

Apply it

A database ranks one missing person first based on several coded restorations. Verify those entries against original records and compare diagnostic images, including contradictions, before deciding whether the candidate merits a positive or lesser identification conclusion.

Apply it

An unerupted permanent tooth has a substantially formed root on imaging and an obstructed eruption path. Assess its developmental stage using an appropriate reference rather than assigning a younger age simply because the crown is not visible clinically.

Apply it

For a boy, stages F, H, F, G, F, H, H for second molar, first molar, second premolar, first premolar, canine, lateral incisor and central incisor score 13.2 + 19.3 + 12.8 + 12.7 + 10.0 + 13.7 + 11.8 = 93.5. The original boys' conversion gives dental age 11.7 years, not exact chronological age.

Apply it

If the canine is unavailable bilaterally but the second molar, both premolars and central incisor are suitable, a specified Demirjian four-tooth method may be considered. Omitting the canine from a seven-tooth sum does not create a valid four-tooth assessment. In a hypothetical Cameriere measurement, a two-rooted tooth with open-apex distances of 0.6 and 0.4 mm has A_i = 1.0 mm. With whole-tooth length L_i = 20 mm, x_i = 0.05. A tooth with completed root development contributes to N0.

Apply it

Three methods use the same panoramic image and overlapping root stages. Explain their shared information before combining results, and retain an uncertainty assessment justified by the methods rather than shrinking the interval solely because three numbers agree.

Apply it

For a living person, suitable radiographs may permit a Kvaal assessment without removing tooth structure. Lamendin requires access to an extracted root; Johanson consumes structure through sectioning. Neither extraction of a healthy tooth nor destructive preparation follows merely from a request to estimate age.

Apply it

An appropriate method yields an estimate of 18.2 years with a supported interval spanning ages below and above 18. Report the interval and threshold uncertainty rather than certifying adulthood solely because the central estimate exceeds 18.