FlintO.P. (1992). In Vitro Test Validation: A House Built on Sand (Editorial).ATLA20, 196–198.
2.
BallsM., BlaauboerB., BrusickD., FrazierJ., LambD., PembertonM., ReinhardtC., RoberfroidM., RosenkranzH., SchmidB., SpielmannH., StammatiA-L., & WalumE. (1990). Report and recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT workshop on the validation of toxicity test procedures.ATLA18, 313–337.
3.
KruszewskiF.H., HearnL.H., SmithK.T., TealJ.J., GordonV.C., and DickensM.S. (1992). Application of the EYTEX™ system to the evaluation of cosmetic products and their ingredients.ATLA20, 146–163.
4.
ThomsonM.A., DickensM.S., and GordonV.C. (1989). Evaluation of the EYTEX™ biochemical assay for use in determining cosmetic product irritancy. Abstract presented at the Symposium of the Johns Hopkins Centre for Alternatives to Animal Testing: In Vitro Toxicology — New Directions, April 4, 1989, Baltimore, MD.
5.
GettingsS.D., TealJ.J., BagleyD.M., DemetruliasJ.L., DiPasqualeL.C., HintzeK.L., RozenM.G., WeiseS.L., ChudkowskiM., MarenusK.D., PapeW.J.W., RoddyM., SchnetzingerR., SilberP.M., GlazaS.M., and KurtzP.J. (1991). The CTFA Evaluation of Alternatives Program. An evaluation of in vitro alternatives to the Draize primary eye irritation test. (Phase I) Hydroalcoholic formulations; (Part 2) data analysis and biological significance.In Vitro Toxicology4, 247–287.
6.
BallsM., BothamP., CordierS., FumeroS., KayserD., KoëterH., KoundakjianP., LindquistN.G., MeyerO., PiodaL., ReinhardtC., RozemondH., SmyrniotisH., SpielmannH., Van LooyH., van der VenneM-T., & WalumE. (1990). Report and recommendations of an international workshop on promotion of the regulatory acceptance of validated non-animal toxicity test procedures.ATLA18, 339–344.