Review of Medical Linguistics in Computing with Special Reference to ‘Mumps’

  • D. E. Clark
  • T. C. Sharpe
  • A. J. Duxbury


Computers were first used in medicine in the U.K. in 1953. The first computer at the National Institutes of Health in Washington was delivered in 1958. Computers have until recently been difficult to use for processing medical data. In the early sixties the American Government invested a considerable amount of money in computers in medicine, and some of this was spent at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) where attempts were made to computerise the hospital. Bolt, Baronach and Newman, the consultants in this venture, used a modified version of the interactive computer language ‘JOSS’ which ran on a PDP-1 computer sited remotely from the hospital. On this machine the language was called ‘TELECOMP’ but refined for medical purposes it became ‘MEDCOMP’. A great deal of work was done in the hospital but progress was slow and difficult, and the need for a simple high-level language for medical work was evident.


Medical Data Massachusetts General Hospital Medical Work User Program Digital Equipment Corporation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Korein et al. Computer Processing of Medical Data by Variable Field Length Format. JAMA, June 1966, vol. 196, No.11.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sweeney et al. Tulane Information Processing System. Tulane University Computer Science Series, 1965.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cantor, D., Dimsdale, B., Hurwitz, A. Query Language One. IBM Form No. 320–2627, June, 1969.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pratt, A.W., Automatic Processing of Pathology Data. Leaflet published by National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wingert, F. Word Segmentation and Morpheme Dictionary for Pathology Data Processing. Proceedings of the Medinfo ’74 Conference, Stockholm, August, 1974.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clark, D.E., Sharpe, T.C., Yates, P.O. ‘MUMAS’. Proceedings of the Medinfo ’74 Conference, Stockholm, August, 1974.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Desautels, E.J., Smith, D.K., An Introduction to the String Manipulation Language SN0B0L. Programming Systems & Languages, by Saul Rosen, published McGraw-Hill, pp 419.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yngve, V.H., COMIT as an IR Language, Programming Systems & Languages, by Saul Rosen, published McGraw-Hill, pp 375.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scherr, A.L. An Analysis of Time-Shared Computer Systems. published M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glueck, B.C. Use of a Psychiatric Patient Record System. FASEB Federation Proceedings, December, 1974, vol. 33, No.12.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sharpe, T.C. Analysis of Free-Text Medical Records by Computer Programs Written in a High-level Language. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology, 1973. pp 56.Google Scholar
  12. 12..
    Nie, N.H., Bent, D.H., Hull, C.H. SPSS. Published McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  13. 13..
    Dixon, W.J. BMD. University of California Publications, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  14. 14..
    Wilcox, J. Personal communication. Details of an N.I.H. contract.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. E. Clark
    • 1
  • T. C. Sharpe
    • 1
  • A. J. Duxbury
    • 1
  1. 1.Medical Computing UnitUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations