Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42538595›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of biological anthropology2026

From Optimism to Opportunity: New Perspectives on the Osteological Paradox.

Clare McFadden, Amy Anderson, Lucie Biehler-Gomez, Rachael Brown, Kathryn E Marklein, Sammuel Sammut, Bronwyn Wyatt, Samantha L Yaussy

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of biological anthropology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Clare McFaddenSchool of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9515-5392
Amy AndersonInstitute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9204-9076
Lucie Biehler-GomezLaboratory of Forensic Anthropology and Odontology (LABANOF), Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6674-7850
Rachael BrownSchool of Philosophy, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Kathryn E MarkleinDepartment of Anthropology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1959-035X
Sammuel SammutSchool of Archaeology and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Bronwyn WyattIndependent Researcher, Canberra, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7259-0677
Samantha L YaussyDepartment of Sociology and Anthropology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7069-2637

Funding

Australian National UniversityNational Geographic Society EC-67820R-20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Osteological Paradox has had an immeasurable impact on bioarchaeology. It has spurred introspection, increased scientific rigor, and encouraged a suite of new and valuable approaches and methods to deal with the challenges it raises. Contrastingly, it has also been perceived as insurmountable, or a problem that simply needs to be acknowledged but not dealt with. In this synthesis, we discuss past and current approaches to the Osteological Paradox, the promise we believe agent-based modeling holds for future research, and broadly contextualize the Paradox within a philosophically optimistic outlook. Our synthesis represents a range of diverse perspectives from bioarchaeology and philosophy, and seeks to identify a path forward. We conclude that the Osteological Paradox represents a springboard more than a hurdle; one that continues to propel the discipline forward and supports the ongoing integration of new technologies to answer questions about past societies.

Indexed as

ArchaeologyOsteologyPhilosophyHumans

Identifiers

PMID42538595
PMCPMC13428063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.