Dear Doug,
thanks for reply.
But isn't it statistically the same: compare e.g. the thickness of morbid group 1 with the controll group via Qdec respectively compare both groups via contrasts (e.g. 1 0 0 -1) in mri_glmfit?
For me the only advantage of mri_glmfit is to controll for more variables/covariates. Are there more advantages?
Kind regards
Sandy
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2015 um 16:27 Uhr
Von: "Douglas Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
An: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Betreff: Re: [Freesurfer] comparison of 4 groups: mri_glmfit or Qdec?
Von: "Douglas Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
An: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Betreff: Re: [Freesurfer] comparison of 4 groups: mri_glmfit or Qdec?
yes, use mri_glmfit
doug
On 10/26/15 3:34 AM, Sandy Schramm wrote:
> Dear Experts,
>
> we want to compare data (thickness) of 4 groups (3 morbid groups and 1
> controll group). Both, Qdec and mri_glmfit, will do the same analyses.
> But we are not sure, if the usage of Qdec is statistically correct in
> our case. Because in Qdec we can only compare 2 of the 4 groups. But
> Qdec is much more comfortable to handle.
> Or do you advise the mri_glmfit for our data analyses?
>
> Thanks for some advice!
> Sandy Schramm
> _______________________________________________
> 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
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.
doug
On 10/26/15 3:34 AM, Sandy Schramm wrote:
> Dear Experts,
>
> we want to compare data (thickness) of 4 groups (3 morbid groups and 1
> controll group). Both, Qdec and mri_glmfit, will do the same analyses.
> But we are not sure, if the usage of Qdec is statistically correct in
> our case. Because in Qdec we can only compare 2 of the 4 groups. But
> Qdec is much more comfortable to handle.
> Or do you advise the mri_glmfit for our data analyses?
>
> Thanks for some advice!
> Sandy Schramm
> _______________________________________________
> 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
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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
