Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40069966›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025

The DCIDE framework: systematic investigation of evolutionary hypotheses, exemplified with autism.

Adam D Hunt, Adrian V Jaeggi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Adam D HuntInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, 8057, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8923-5812
Adrian V JaeggiInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, 8057, Switzerland.

Funding

Fondation Pierre MercierUniversität Zürich FK-21-062
6 · The paper itself

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

Autistic DisorderBiological EvolutionHumansautismevolutionary psychiatryevolutionary psychologymental healthneurodiversityscientific methodology

Identifiers

PMID40069966
PMCPMC12227788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.