Hi Christine,
we have a set of tools we use mainly written by Doug called FS-FAST, but we
have also worked hard with FMRIB to make it easy to do surface-based
analysis using FSL. I think there are some tutorials on this on our wiki,
and perhaps on one of the Oxford sites as well (Steve and Doug: can you
chime in?).
Surface-based as a lot of advantages, mainly in terms of the accuracy of
cross-subject registration and the power gained in smoothing on the surface
as opposed to the volume. The disadvantages mainly come from the
possibility of misregistration and thus missing data, as you note. And of
course it doesn't represent activation in deep structures (e.g. caudate).
cheers,
Bruce
On Tue, 8 May 2007,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Doug & Ohers,
I see that there are nice interfaces between Feat and Freesurfer for rendering
Feat output onto the surface. Now for group fMRI stats it would obviously be
advantageous to do all the stats directly on the surface, avoiding volume space
altogether. Especially clsuter thresholding might be an issue here. Am I
correct there?
What approach would you suggest in terms of what software to use for the fMRI
analysis. In our lab we have used mainly FSL tools to do volumetric fMRI
analysis, and are hence most familiar with these, but are considering to moving
to doing all this on the surface. What are people's views on that? Is that an
entirely good thing or are there advantages to volume space analysis? What if
spatial distortions are present in the BOLD images and haven't been corrected
for? Any comments and suggestions on these issues would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Christine
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
