yes, the cerebral white matter is surface-based, so it can take into account sub-voxel resolution of the surfaces. The WMParc is just counting voxels.
Dhinakaran Chinappen wrote: > Dear all, > > I was wondering if you have encountered this issue before: > > Would you anticipate a difference between the volume calculated by > Freesurfer 5.0 in Cerebral-White-Matter volume and the total volume > calculated from the regions (defined by the Desikan atlas) in > wmparc.stats? > > In one of my studies, the Cerebral-White-Matter volume is bigger than > the volume obtained by summing up the regions in wmparc.stats on > average and for individual patients as well. > > Is there an anatomical reason behind this? Which measure should be > preferentially used? > > Help would be much appreciated. > > Thanks, > Dhinakaran. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer -- Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D. MGH-NMR Center gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Phone Number: 617-724-2358 Fax: 617-726-7422 Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail.
