I understand that thickness may vary greatly across the entire surface, but shouldn't we expect some stability within smaller regions (e.g. those in the Desikan/Killany atlas)?
>>> Bruce Fischl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/24/2006 4:40 pm >>> Hi Sasha, the standard deviation across the surface isn't a very meaningful number, since the thickness isn't spatially stationary. cheers, Bruce On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Sasha Wolosin wrote: > Dear all, > I am interested in measuring mean thickness within ROI in MPRAGEs of > children. My mean thickness values tend to be around 3.3 mm, with a > standard deviation of about 1mm. I am concerned that these standard > deviations are somewhat high. What typical values should I be expecting > for standard deviation? > Thanks, > Sasha > > > > Disclaimer: > The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected Health Information. Please note that e-mail is not necessarily confidential or secure. Your use of e-mail constitutes your acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return e-mail. > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > > _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
