Half the respondents (overwhelmingly the largest group) do their authority control manually. Half have brought their MeSH authorities up to date sometime in the last two years, but a third never have. About 70 percent have a mixture in their OPACs of pre-1999, post-1999 and NLM distributed MeSH.
A third of the respondents are using post-1999 MeSH practices in their original cataloging, and almost half are applying post-1999 MeSH practices in their OPACs. The number who would prefer that NLM provide records to bibliographic utilities with post-1999 MeSH nearly equals those who prefer NLM to continue its current practice of providing records with distributed MeSH structure. Thus, respondents appear to be divided on the post-1999 MeSH vs. distributed MeSH structure issue.
The survey also reveals that most vendor systems' global modification functionality are not adequate to convert old records in catalogs to agree with either NLM's current practices (post-1999) or NLM's distributed structure (distributed through utilities like OCLC).
Almost 60 percent enrich OCLC records with NLM classification and MeSH on a regular basis. Almost three-fourths would download MeSH authority records from OCLC if available.
Finally, an unexpectedly large number of comments probably indicate that MeSH authority control is a topic of very high interest to respondents.
We hope you will enjoy examining the survey results and that you will contact the survey coordinators if you are interested in the work that HSOCLCUG is doing. MeSH authorities, OCLC new directions, changes at NLM, and resource sharing/universal MARC Holdings are four areas of special interest to HSOCLCUG.
The survey coordinators:
Dan Kniesner (email@example.com) and Judith Dzierba (Judith_L_Dzierba@rush.edu)."