Abstract
A survey of North American medical school libraries was made to determine current trends in subject cataloging practices. First, responses from 114 of these libraries are recorded and analyzed in the following areas: subject heading authority lists employed; use of the divided versus the dictionary catalog; and the form in which local subject authority files are kept. Then, focusing on 78 libraries that use MeSH in combination with a divided catalog, a further analysis of responses is made concerning issues relating to subject cataloging practices: updating the subject catalog to conform to annual MeSH changes; use of guide cards in the catalog; use of MeSH subheadings; filing conventions; and related issues. An attempt is made to analyze the extent to which these libraries vary from NLM practices. Suggestions are offered for formulating subject cataloging practices for an individual library. Finally, while it is concluded that MeSH and the Current Catalog are useful tools, a more detailed explication of the use of MeSH and NLM cataloging practices would be beneficial.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- HAYDOCK E. THE MESH LIST AND BOOK CATOLOGING IN MEDICAL LIBRARIES. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1964 Jul;52:545–556. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McNutt E. M., Poland U. H. Three-way division combined with conversion to Medical Subject Headings(MeSH) in a medium-sized medical library. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1974 Oct;62(4):388–396. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pachefsky R. Survey of the card catalog in medical libraries. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1969 Jan;57(1):10–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rogers F. B. Problems of medical subject cataloging. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1968 Oct;56(4):355–364. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]