ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025
The DCIDE framework: systematic investigation of evolutionary hypotheses, exemplified with autism.
Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Ultimate and Proximate Explanations of Neurodivergence: Evolutionary Trade-Offs, Compensation, and Clinical Expression.Evolutionary applications · 2026Article
- Beyond Comorbidity: Evolutionary Insights Into the Concomitance of Neurodivergence, Major Depressive Disorder, and Anxiety Disorders.Evolutionary applications · 2026Article
- Ethno-evolutionary insights and missed critical periods hypothesis of Autism Spectrum Condition.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Evolutionary research on mental health in non-industrialized contexts: An introduction to the special issue.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2026Article
- Women's mental health: current status and evolutionary perspectives.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026Review
- A hundred and two just-so stories: exploring the lay evolutionary hypotheses of the manosphere.Evolutionary human sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing subclinical psychopathological and personality traits in a small-scale subsistence society.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evolutionary explanations of mental disorders are a longstanding aim of evolutionary psychiatry, but have suffered from complexities including within-disorder heterogeneity and environmental effects of contemporary societies obscuring possible ancestral functions. Studying the relevant processes of human evolution directly is not possible, so hypotheses have remained speculative, exaggerating "just-so storytelling" critiques. This is despite significant evidence existing in genetics, neuroscience and epidemiology, all of which bears some inferential relevance to evolutionary hypotheses, but which is often not marshalled in a systematic way. To utilise this evidence best to investigate evolutionary explanations of psychiatric (or other) traits we present a novel framework of evidence synthesis and analysis and exemplify it by systematically reviewing evidence related to autism. In the five stages of this "DCIDE framework" analysis, Description identifies a trait to explain and Categorisation initially excludes verifiably non-adaptive cases by utilising evidence from genetics, neuroscience, and environmental factors. Integration then hones a target for adaptive explanation by considering evidence of age of onset, environmental effects, duration, prevalence and sex differences, incorporating relevant correlated traits visible to selection. Evolutionary hypotheses are then Depicted and Evaluated for their ability to explain all the evidence at hand, using standardised areas of evidence and theoretically motivated principles (e.g. traits arising at birth and lasting for life have different plausible explanations than traits arising in adolescence and receding in adulthood). Competing evolutionary hypotheses can thus be systematically compared for their sufficiency in explaining a wide range of available evidence. In the DCIDE review of autism, when Described with current diagnostic criteria, up to 20% of cases Categorise as non-adaptive, primarily caused by de novo mutations and environmental trauma. The remaining cases are eligible for adaptive explanation. For Integrating genetically correlated phenotypes, evidence of high prevalence of subclinical familial traits and camouflaged female cases is necessary. Competing Depictions contrast a high intelligence by-product hypothesis with social niche specialisation for high "systemising" cognition. In Evaluation, broad evidence supports the social niche hypothesis while the intelligence by-product hypothesis fails to predict various lines of evidence. This provides not only the most robust synthesis of autism research relevant to evolutionary explanation to date, but is a first example of how the structure of the DCIDE framework can allow improved systematic evolutionary analysis across psychiatric conditions, and may also be adopted to strengthen evolutionary psychology more generally, countering just-so storytelling and cherry-picking critiques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.