Hi Maia
it's hard to say since I don't really know what steps worked in 5.3 or
why vs. 5.1. I guess you could try starting from after the normalization in
5.1 and seeing if they go through the rest of recon-all
Bruce
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Maia Pujara wrote:
Thanks for your response, Bruce. Since we would rather not re-run all 200+
subjects through version 5.3, would it be possible, for the sake of keeping
things consistent, to add any flags to recon-all using version 5.1, to be
able to include the remaining 35 subjects into our analysis?
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Maia Pujara <maiapuj...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
After running 200+ subjects through recon-all using version 5.1, all
but 30 came back with complete surfaces. The 30 that failed seem to
have the same problem with normalization.
After re-running these 30 subjects with v5.3, we were able to get a
good quality brainmask.mgz output, which was not the case when we ran
these subjects through v5.1. See attached for comparisons of v5.1 and
v5.3 outputs.
Would we need to be adding additional flags to get 5.1 to produce
usable results for these subjects? Or might there be some other
workaround for this?
Thanks in advance!
Maia
_______________________________________________
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.
