Irwin screen
Open-knowledge reference entry
In the fields of toxicology and pathology, the Irwin screen is utilised to determine whether the subject(s) show adverse effects from a course of pharmaceutical treatment or environmental pollution. It is an observational methodology.
History
Mice were first used systematically to determine a drug's central nervous system side effects by S. Irwin in 1962 and then again in 1968. Its use in the pharmaceutical industry has become ingrained since then, as below.
The National Academy of Sciences issued in 1975 a position paper on the "Principles for Evaluating Chemicals in the Environment." This paper influenced government and academic circles, and was adopted by e.g. Brimblecombe for his study of atmospheric arsenic levels. The critical review in 1982 by Mitchell and Tilson, caused the US EPA to develop guidelines for several behavioural tests including a test series based on the Irwin Screen, named the Functional Observational Battery (FOB) by Sette in 1989. In 1998, the FOB was published in the late 1990s as EPA Human Health 870 Series Test Guidelines, and in praxis the Irwin screen and the FOB "overlap and to some extent are interchangeable."
The American batteries were harmonised with the OECD's from the same era. Similar tests on food chemicals were recommended by the FDA in their Red Book. Behavioural test batteries are now required for new drugs by the S7A group of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH).
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Irwin screen” as open-knowledge reference entry. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as open-knowledge reference entry. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 30, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q85770039. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1962, 1968, 1975 and 1982.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Irwin screen”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Irwin screen primary sources, Irwin screen archive and Irwin research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Irwin screen”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Irwin screen” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.