Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Assessment of the Mouth

Assessment of the Mouth

A thorough mouth assessment, including inspection and palpation of the lips, gums, tongue, tonsils, uvula, and pharynx, is crucial in detecting potential health issues. Diseases ranging from oral cancer to systemic conditions like diabetes could be identified early through careful oral examination. This article provides a detailed guide on conducting a comprehensive mouth assessment.
Mouth Inspection
The inspection begins with visually examining the mouth for symmetry, color, and size.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Coherent amplitude modulation of continuous-wave light in cesium vapor.

Optics letters·2024

Same author

Ultrafast multi-cycle terahertz measurements of the electrical conductivity in strongly excited solids.

Nature communications·2021

Same author

Search for a Light CP-odd Higgs Boson and Low-Mass Dark Matter at the Belle Experiment.

Physical review letters·2019

Same author

First Measurements of Absolute Branching Fractions of the Ξ_{c}^{0} Baryon at Belle.

Physical review letters·2019

Same author

Observation of Ξ(1620)^{0} and Evidence for Ξ(1690)^{0} in Ξ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{-}π^{+}π^{+} Decays.

Physical review letters·2019

Same author

Observation of Transverse Λ/Λ[over ¯] Hyperon Polarization in e^{+}e^{-} Annihilation at Belle.

Physical review letters·2019

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 13, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

Published on: January 28, 2020

A simple assessment method for auditing multi-centre unilateral cleft lip repairs.

J B Kim¹, P Strike, M C Cadier

¹Odstock Centre for Plastic Surgery, Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury, Wiltshire, SP2 8BJ, United Kingdom. jongbkim2001@yahoo.co.uk

Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery : JPRAS

|May 18, 2010

Summary

Human judgment reliably assesses cleft lip repair outcomes. This study used subjective ratings from medical and laypersons to evaluate surgical success, demonstrating high reproducibility for ranking surgeon performance and aiding future research.

More Related Videos

A Simplified Protocol for Protecting Palatal Soft Tissue Donor Sites Using an Oral Mucoadhesive Bandage

A Simplified Protocol for Protecting Palatal Soft Tissue Donor Sites Using an Oral Mucoadhesive Bandage

Published on: February 17, 2026

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 13, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

Published on: January 28, 2020

A Simplified Protocol for Protecting Palatal Soft Tissue Donor Sites Using an Oral Mucoadhesive Bandage

A Simplified Protocol for Protecting Palatal Soft Tissue Donor Sites Using an Oral Mucoadhesive Bandage

Published on: February 17, 2026

Area of Science:

Plastic Surgery
Otolaryngology
Aesthetic Medicine

Background:

Cleft lip repair aims for functional and aesthetic results, but outcome assessment remains subjective.
Existing methods lack objective measures, hindering reliable comparisons.
Human judgment is recognized as a reliable tool for assessing facial aesthetics.

Purpose of the Study:

To develop and validate a subjective assessment method for cleft lip repair outcomes.
To compare surgical outcomes across multiple UK cleft centers.
To establish a reliable tool for ranking surgeon performance and aiding education.

Main Methods:

A tri-center comparative audit involving 37 patients with complete unilateral cleft lip defects.
Preoperative and 5-year postoperative photographs were rated by 10 medical and 10 laypersons using a 5-point scale.
Intra- and inter-rater reliability was assessed using weighted kappa scores.

Main Results:

High levels of intra- and inter-rater reproducibility were observed in both medical and layperson groups.
The subjective assessment method proved effective as a ranking tool for aesthetic outcomes.
The technique demonstrated reliability for comparing surgeons and centers.

Conclusions:

Subjective assessment by human raters provides a reliable method for evaluating cleft lip repair outcomes.
This technique can be used to rank surgeons and centers, promoting quality improvement.
The method supports educational initiatives and national inter-center comparisons in cleft care.