Cited by 331Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications

Dynamic causal modelling: A critical review of the biophysical and statistical foundations

Open access
Daunizeau, J., David, O., Stephan, K.E.·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

The goal of dynamic causal modelling (DCM) of neuroimaging data is to study experimentally induced changes in functional integration among brain regions. This requires (i) biophysically plausible and physiologically interpretable models of neuronal network dynamics that can predict distributed brain responses to experimental stimuli and (ii) efficient statistical methods for parameter estimation and model comparison. These two key components of DCM have been the focus of more than thirty methodological articles since the seminal work of Friston and colleagues published in 2003. In this paper, we provide a critical review of the current state-of-the-art of DCM. We inspect the properties of DCM in relation to the most common neuroimaging modalities (fMRI and EEG/MEG) and the specificity of inference on neural systems that can be made from these data. We then discuss both the plausibility of the underlying biophysical models and the robustness of the statistical inversion techniques. Finally, we discuss potential extensions of the current DCM framework, such as stochastic DCMs, plastic DCMs and field DCMs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.11.062

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dynamic causal models (DCMs) allow one to infer directed synaptic connections (effective connectivity) from neuroimaging or electrophysiological data.

    “dynamic causal models (DCMs; for reviews see Daunizeau et al., 2011; Friston et al., 2013) allow one to infer directed synaptic connections (effective connectivity) from neuroimaging or electrophysiological data.”

    From Allostatic Self-efficacy: A Metacognitive Theory of Dyshomeostasis-Induced Fatigue and Depression (2016) · cites this paper as Daunizeau et al., 2011

    Section 2.1 (p. 6) describes DCMs as modelling directed effective-connectivity edges between brain regions or neuronal populations using fMRI and EEG/MEG data. The Introduction (p. 4), however, distinguishes effective connectivity—directed causal influence—from structural connectivity, which includes anatomical synaptic connections. The source therefore supports inference about directed effective connectivity, but not the claim that DCM infers synaptic connections as such. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Model-based methods depend on the choice of the model and its parameters, so many different parameters need to be tested to ensure unbiased results.

    “Model-based methods depend on the choice of the model and its parameters; thus many different parameters need to be tested to ensure unbiased results (112).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Daunizeau, J., David, O., & Stephan, K. E.
Affiliations
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-09
Volume
58
Issue
2
Pages
312-322
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2133352409
Cited by
331
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 18
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
University Research Priority Program “Foundations of Human Social Behaviour”
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
dynamic causal modeling, neuronal network dynamics, biophysical model, parameter estimation, model comparison, functional MRI, EEG, MEG, functional integration
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Biophysics, Brain Mapping, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Electroencephalography, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Neurological, Reproducibility of Results, Magnetoencephalography, Models, Statistical, Causality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review