THE DENTAL INDEX-ONE HUNDRED YEARS; ITS FUTURE*

By ALICE M. MCCANN Librarian, University of Pittsburgh School of Dentistry WITH THE publication of the 1936-1938 volume of the Index of the Periodical Dental Literature in the English Language, ninety-nine years of dental literature, dating from 1839 to 1938, has been indexed and published. This is a tremendous accomplishment, and all through the efforts of a small group of men who had the best interests of their profession at heart. They gave generously of their time and money through the years. The late Dr. Arthur D. Black was ever the motivating and guiding spirit, and served as editor and chairman of the Dental Index Bureau from 1909 until his death in 1938, without monetary remuneration. The framework of the Dental Index, as it is popularly termed, was started as early as 1898, when Dr. Black and Dr. Frederick B. Noyes devised a numerical classification system from the well-known Dewey Decimal Classification for books and bound periodicals, which is really intended for works of like subjects to be grouped together on shelves. The first volume to be published appeared in 1921, and covered the years from 1911 to 1915. Other volumes appeared in rapid succession. The financing of the Dental Index has always been a serious obstacle to the progress of the work, and is largely responsible for the fact that it is not current. The Dental Index Bureau was established in 1909, under the auspices of the American Institute of Dental Teachers, and the financial burden has been carried by the American Dental Association since 1925. Upon the death of Dr. Black, the work of continuing the Dental Index has been assumed by the Central Office of the American Dental Association, under the direction of Mrs. Josephine P. Hunt, the Librarian of the Library Bureau of the American Dental Association. The entire fifteen volumes have been indexed according to the classified numerical system devised by Dr. Black and Dr. Noyes, with a separate author section, alphabetically arranged. Within the last five years there has been a growing sentiment against this system in favor of a dictionary arrangement consisting of author and subject, in one alphabet. It has been said that even with the best of literature and the best of
*

Read at the annual meeting of the Medical Library Association, Portland, Oregon,

June 26, 1940.

163

164

ALICE M. MCCANN

abstracts, the literature of any science or profession would be a plumbless ocean without a good index. Its arrangement should conform to well established and standardized methods of bibliographic procedure, enabling the investigator to locate quickly any desired information. Accordingly, the new volume covering the years 1939-1941, which is in the process of being compiled, but which will not come from the press until 1942, will be drastically changed and will have bibliographic data that conforms to accepted standards, namely, author, title, volume number, inclusive paging, month and year, and with arabic in place of roman numerals for volume numbers. The arrangement will be a dictionary one in place of the out-moded numerical classification which was never suited to ephemeral publications. These changes have been brought about through the recommendation of persons and groups who were interested only in the fact that we are living in a changing world, with different educational concepts, and with scientific literature appearing at a staggering increase. It is gratifying to know that the Dental Index Committee of the American Dental Association has authorized these changes, thereby making the Dental Index a much more efficient reference tool for the use of the faculty, students, research workers, practitioners, and last but not least, the librarians, who perhaps consult it more than any other group. Mrs. Hunt, in her very interesting paper which she gave at the Dental Library Centenary Meeting, held in Baltimore on March 19, 1940, in conjunction with the Dental Centenary Celebration, discussed the contemplated changes at some length, particularly the question of subject headings, and also the abbreviations to be used for the titles of the journals to be indexed. In the matter of the type of subject headings to be used, it has been decided not to use the type adopted by the Quarterly Cumulative Index Medicus, which uses broad headings under the anatomical part of the body or name of the disease, with many subdivisions. The argument against this type of heading is that it is unnecessary as only one region of the body is being indexed. A new list of subject headings is now available in mimeographed form and anyone interested may procure a copy without cost from the Library Bureau of the American Dental Association. In studying the new list of subject headings one wishes that with the passing of time it may increase in scholarliness and consistency. With the multiplicity of entries as will be found in a dictionary type of index it is of paramount importance that if the index is to reach the peak of usefulness it must be uniform with other indexes in allied fields, such as medicine, biology, and chemistry. Subject headings are never a matter of personal preference, but are based upon certain standards which make for clarity. It is even more important, now that the Dental Index is being

THE DENTAL INDEX

1 165

transformed to a more up-to-date arrangement, that uniformity and consistency be stressed, than when it was published in the old form. Our students are being trained to use scientific nomenclature, established by scholars within the professions of dentistry and medicine, and their national index should adhere to that nomenclature. Anatomical parts should most certainly be given a major position, with subdivisions of conditions relating to them. For example, Anesthesia and Anesthetics are allied terms; why not Anesthesia, with "see references" to the latter? In the matter of "Bite-taking of," would it not be more specific as "JawRegistration," with the subdivisions: "Centric"; "Labial"; "Protrusive"? The terms, "Articulation" and "Occlusion-Artificial teeth," are two different things, and should never be under the same heading. "Acrylic resins" should be under the major heading, "Resins," with the subdivisions. "Acrylic"; "phenol-formaldehyde," etc. Minute details make or break an index. The type of material to be indexed in the new volume is also of deep concern to its users. It is true that in the past only dental literature in the English language has been indexed. Why not expand its scope to include material published in the foreign languages and all articles of interest to the dental profession in biology, chemistry and medicine. The profession of dentistry is being rapidly expanded in all of its specialties, and in order for the index to keep abreast with the profession, it would seem advisable to include everything pertinent to the subject. The teeth are integral parts of the body and not inert pegs upon which to hang something. Reports, proceedings, transactions and monographs should be indexed, for often the first report of new discoveries will appear in these publications. Proprietary publications should be excluded, since there is unquestionably a feeling throughout the dental profession that proprietary journalism, like proprietary dental schools, is no longer desirable, and since such influential organizations as the American College of Dentists, and the American Association of Dental Editors have taken a definite stand on the subject, it would seem undesirable to continue longer to index articles in such publications. The abbreviations to be used for the titles of the journals being indexed are those adopted by the American Association of Dental Editors. This list is an exceedingly arbitrary one, and is in total disagreement with accepted usage by various learned societies, Webster's International Dictionary, the American Chemical Society, the IndexCatalogue of the Library of the Surgeon-General's Office, and the American Medical Association, all of which index thousands of publications. Uniformity is certainly desirable in bibliographic data, but the use of "bul." for "bulletin"; "quar." for "quarterly"; "A." for "Association"; "col." for "college"; "d." for "dental" and "den." for "dentistry" (den being a part of speech of the Germanic and Scandinavian languages)

166

ALICE M. MCCANN

only creates confusion and conflicts with certain publications in foreign languages. There is such a thing as reducing abbreviations to the point of obscurity. Most of us are acutely aware of the need of a current dental index. It is agreed that it would be of much greater service if it could appear more often than every three years. For the very nominal sum of twelve dollars a year to the subscriber, the American Medical Association is able to produce four issues a year of the Quarterly Cumulative Index Medicus, which is certainly an achievement. More over, a tremendous amount of literature which has a definite relation to the oral cavity and a few dental journals are indexed in it. None of the articles pertaining to technical procedures are included. It is the only index which is current. The D. volume of the fourth series of the Index-Catalogue of the Library of the Surgeon-General's Office has a very comprehensive section on dentistry, and for the first time articles and books on technical procedures in crown and bridgework, the construction of artificial dentures, et cetera, have been indexed. Beginning with the year 1933, the Dental Index Bureau issued a monthly card service at a cost of five dollars monthly to the subscriber. The American Dental Association is continuing this service, and is now issuing the cards in one alphabet instead of a classified file with a separate author file. The cost of this service is prohibitive to most libraries; the cards, averaging three hundred a month, require additional filing cabinets, and occupy needed floor space. The bibliographic data has been very poorly arranged, and even the trained person has had difficulty in interpreting their meaning, and it is doubly so for the student. It has been said that the subscribing libraries are the ones who use the Dental Index most extensively. This is refuted by studying the list of the subscribers, for it will be found that the largest and most active libraries are not subscribers to the monthly cards, for it is felt that they are a very inefficient substitute for a yearly, bound index. It is true that the Dental Index has a limited number of purchasers, as very few dentists or physicians would purchase a copy, preferring to consult it in a library. Its sale is limited to the dental schools, dental society libraries, and a few medical libraries. In order to expedite the publication of the Dental Index it is suggested that the Dental Index Committee of the American Dental Association consult specialists within the field, or a subcommittee be appointed from among dental educators, with several persons known to have a comprehensive knowledge of bibliography and research, also serving on the committee, to produce a volume each year. This would seem to solve the problem of insuring a scholarly and comprehensive index, for it is of great importance that such an index be provided for a profession which will be called upon to use all of its knowledge and skill in helping

THE DENTAL INDEX

167

to restore to society the millions of casualties of the Second World War, which have already reached appalling figures in all of their ghastliness. As a reference tool for use with the faculty, students and research workers it is indispensable. This is the Dental Centenary year, commemorative of one hundred years of professional progress, dating from the printing of the first dental journal, the American journal of Dental Science; the founding of the first dental college, the Baltimore College of Dental Surgery; and the establishment of the first national dental society, the American Society of Dental Surgeons. During this time much scientific progress has become an established fact, and dentistry is now recognized as a necessary health service of medicine. It should have an index comparable to its many accomplishments and it should be current. The numerical classification devised by Dr. Black and Dr. Noyes should be retained, as it is excellent for books which are specifically dental, although it needs to be expanded, with some slight rearrangement, as it is the only comprehensive classification we have for dentistry. Both the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification are totally inadequate. It could either be published separately, or form a section of the Dental Index, although it is a needless expense to include it in each successive volume, but only when a revised edition is to be published. We are embarking on a new century of professional progress. Let us heed Louis Pasteur's counsel to the young physicians, "Do not let yourselves be discouraged by the sadness of certain hours which pass over nations. Live in the serene peace of laboratories and libraries. Say to yourselves first, 'What have I done for my instruction?' and, as you gradually advance, 'What have I done for my country?' until the time comes when you may have the immense happiness of thinking that you have contributed in some way to the progress and to the good of humanity."