[Freesurfer] calculating percent signal change
Hello,
I am trying to calculate the percent signal changes for my monkey data.
I did this by running the command selxavg3-sess and looking at the cespct
values (or equivalently by using h.nii divided by h-offset.nii).
I found in the mailing list that this value should be corrected by a scaling
factor scalef if freesurfer-4.5.0 is used (see below).
If I apply this correction factor I got values that at first sight look
reasonable but if i calcultate the psc using JIP (the imaging program from Joe
Mandeville), i find different values.
And looking at the raw data I have to conclude that the value from JIP are the
correct ones...
For example if i look at the same voxel in MT if find:
with JIP: -14.45%
with FS: -8.15 %
notice that the values are negative and pretty large due to the fact that we
use and iron oxide contrast agent.
If, instead of applying the scaling factor scalef (defined below), I apply the
factor max(x.X(:,1)) as a scaling factor (which according to me is the maximum
value of the convolved design matrix,or 'the EV' in FSL lingo),
then I end up with a value of -15.09%. Which is pretty close to the value
obtained with JIP.
I got the last idea from mumford.fmripower.org/perchange_guide.pdf
Do you have any clue where the differences come from? or if I am doing
something wrong?
Also, one of my colleagues used both the gamma model and FIR model to calculate
the percent signal change (psc) for his event-related designed experiment, and
the values are also quite different.
He applied the scaling factor for the values from the gamma model, and didn't
do it for the fir model. What he got is 0.6% signal change if he takes the peak
of the time course (which looks quite ok) that fitted from the FIR model
and 1.5% signal change from the gamma model. It seems that there is more than 2
times differences between these two values. Is it normal, or we need another
scale factor for the fir model?
Thanks for the answers!
regards,
Thomas Janssens
ps:
My selxavg3-sess analysis was done using the following parameters in the
analysis.cfg file:
-gammafit 0 8
-gammaexp 0.3
-timewindow 40.
-prestim 0
-acfbins 10
-fix-acf
-autostimdur
-no-fsv3-st2fir
-no-fsv3-whiten
-polyfit 2
-TER .1000
-autowhiten 30
-nskip 0
-fwhm 0
-rescale 1000
--
[Freesurfer] Calculating % Signal Change from roisummary-sess readout
Douglas N Greve
Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:25:52 -0700
That's right, though you may/will run into the problem of very small
values in which case you can use this fix:
cd bold/analysis
x = load('X');
tirf = x.flac0.ev(3).tirf;
Xirf = x.flac0.ev(3).Xirf;
scalef = sum(Xirf .* repmat(tirf,[1 size(Xirf,2)]));
scalef will be something like 184. Multiply the percent signal change
you get by this number. BTW, this problem is fixed in version 5.
doug
Adam Nitenson wrote:
Hi Freesurfers,
I am trying to analyze functional activity in individual subjects.
The structural constraint is a dACC label and the functional
constraint is positive activation at a specific timepoint (6 sec
after stimulus). I was just wondering what the numbers following the
# of estimates per condition row actually represented, and how I
could convert these to % signal change. I saw in an archived email
http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg00171.html
that someone mentioned taking those values, dividing by the baseline
offset value (row 4) and multiplying by 100 to get % signal change.
Is this a valid method?
Adam Nitenson, B.S.
Brain Genomics Lab
Massachusetts General Hospital
--
Thomas Janssens, PhD student
Laboratorium voor Neuro- en Psychofysiologie
K.U.Leuven Medical School
Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven (Belgium)
phone +32 16 33 00 35
cell phone +32 494 115 509
___
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.
Re: [Freesurfer] Surface Area and Cortical Volume
perhaps an alternative is to use the surface area measure of an ROI, namely the aparc regions, to conduct a group analysis, as the vertex distribution problem is averaged-out over the region. n. On Wed, 2010-09-29 at 21:02 -0700, Don Hagler wrote: The area maps do contain the actual surface area of each vertex with units of mm^2. The problem is that the area at a given vertex depends on how many vertices a given patch of cortex was divided into, which is initially uniform but then varies arbitrarily due to topology correction, rendering it useless for making statistical maps. If you are interested in making statistical maps of between-group differences in surface area, the best way to do that is by calculating the areal expansion measure. This is not a normally used feature of freesurfer, but is possible by using make_average_subject separately for each subject. If you use the area values in the aparc stats files, those are the sum of area for all vertices in each parcellation, and they have units of surface area (unlike measures of areal expansion). From: jsadino.que...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:57:38 -1000 To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: [Freesurfer] Surface Area and Cortical Volume Hello, As I understand it, the surface area measure is not a real surface area measure. It is more a measure of how much the brain has to be stretched in order to get into a common space. My question is that if the cortical volume is calculated by multiplying the thickness and the surface area (right?), then is it a real volume that can be compared between subjects? Also, is it is more accurate to use the cortical volume measures from the aparc files rather than the aseg files, since the aseg files overestimate the white matter due to the manual tracing it is based on? Thank you, Jeff ___ 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 ___ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Re: [Freesurfer] Surface Area and Cortical Volume
Jeff, Posting this back to the list so that others can see your reply. cheers, -MH Forwarded Message From: Jeff Sadino jsadino.que...@gmail.com To: Michael Harms mha...@conte.wustl.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Surface Area and Cortical Volume Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 17:29:45 -1000 Hi Michael, After reading your answer, I can see it as valid for each individual subject. If I wanted to picture the average surface area for my controls, I think the approach would break down. I would have to transform all the surface areas onto a common space subject (fsaverage), and then all of the controls would have the exact same surface area, and so would the study group for that matter. My understanding was that the surface area is a measure of how much each triangle needs to be squished or stretched in order for it to match the triangles in the common space (fsaverage), and so it is a measure of squishiness, not surface area. I may be getting my understanding of vertex-wise analysis mixed up with something else. Your insight is appreciated! Mahalo, Jeff Sadino On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Michael Harms mha...@conte.wustl.edu wrote: Hi Jeff, Where do you get the idea that the area measures are not a real surface area? Once the surface is parcellated, the area of each surface parcellation as provided in the aparc files is simply the area represented by the triangles in the mesh of the white matter surface. If you want the area of the pial surface instead, you can generate those using the appropriate flag in mris_anatomical_stats. But they are real areas, at least at the parcellation level. (It is questionable, as I understand it, whether VERTEX-WISE analyses across groups of the area and volume files are meaningful or informative, but that is a different beast). Yes, for cortical quantification, you want to use the stuff in the aparc files, since it is based on the surface analysis stream. cheers, -MH Hello, As I understand it, the surface area measure is not a real surface area measure. It is more a measure of how much the brain has to be stretched in order to get into a common space. My question is that if the cortical volume is calculated by multiplying the thickness and the surface area (right?), then is it a real volume that can be compared between subjects? Also, is it is more accurate to use the cortical volume measures from the aparc files rather than the aseg files, since the aseg files overestimate the white matter due to the manual tracing it is based on? Thank you, Jeff ___ 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
Re: [Freesurfer] calculating percent signal change
Hi Thomas, you may have found a bug in my scale factor calculation. Can
you compute the new scale factor as described below? BTW, these issues
are fixed in version 5.
cd bold/analysis
x = load('X');
tirf = x.flac0.ev(3).tirf;
Xirf = x.flac0.ev(3).Xirf;
scalefOld = sum(Xirf .* repmat(tirf,[1 size(Xirf,2)]));
TR = x.flac0.TR;
dt = tirf(2)-tirf(1);
scalefNew = sum(Xirf)*TR/dt;
Thomas Janssens wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to calculate the percent signal changes for my monkey data.
I did this by running the command selxavg3-sess and looking at the cespct
values (or equivalently by using h.nii divided by h-offset.nii).
I found in the mailing list that this value should be corrected by a scaling
factor scalef if freesurfer-4.5.0 is used (see below).
If I apply this correction factor I got values that at first sight look
reasonable but if i calcultate the psc using JIP (the imaging program from
Joe Mandeville), i find different values.
And looking at the raw data I have to conclude that the value from JIP are
the correct ones...
For example if i look at the same voxel in MT if find:
with JIP: -14.45%
with FS: -8.15 %
notice that the values are negative and pretty large due to the fact that we
use and iron oxide contrast agent.
If, instead of applying the scaling factor scalef (defined below), I apply
the factor max(x.X(:,1)) as a scaling factor (which according to me is the
maximum value of the convolved design matrix,or 'the EV' in FSL lingo),
then I end up with a value of -15.09%. Which is pretty close to the value
obtained with JIP.
I got the last idea from mumford.fmripower.org/perchange_guide.pdf
Do you have any clue where the differences come from? or if I am doing
something wrong?
Also, one of my colleagues used both the gamma model and FIR model to
calculate the percent signal change (psc) for his event-related designed
experiment, and the values are also quite different.
He applied the scaling factor for the values from the gamma model, and didn't
do it for the fir model. What he got is 0.6% signal change if he takes the
peak of the time course (which looks quite ok) that fitted from the FIR model
and 1.5% signal change from the gamma model. It seems that there is more than
2 times differences between these two values. Is it normal, or we need
another scale factor for the fir model?
Thanks for the answers!
regards,
Thomas Janssens
ps:
My selxavg3-sess analysis was done using the following parameters in the
analysis.cfg file:
-gammafit 0 8
-gammaexp 0.3
-timewindow 40.
-prestim 0
-acfbins 10
-fix-acf
-autostimdur
-no-fsv3-st2fir
-no-fsv3-whiten
-polyfit 2
-TER .1000
-autowhiten 30
-nskip 0
-fwhm 0
-rescale 1000
--
[Freesurfer] Calculating % Signal Change from roisummary-sess readout
Douglas N Greve
Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:25:52 -0700
That's right, though you may/will run into the problem of very small
values in which case you can use this fix:
cd bold/analysis
x = load('X');
tirf = x.flac0.ev(3).tirf;
Xirf = x.flac0.ev(3).Xirf;
scalef = sum(Xirf .* repmat(tirf,[1 size(Xirf,2)]));
scalef will be something like 184. Multiply the percent signal change
you get by this number. BTW, this problem is fixed in version 5.
doug
Adam Nitenson wrote:
Hi Freesurfers,
I am trying to analyze functional activity in individual subjects.
The structural constraint is a dACC label and the functional
constraint is positive activation at a specific timepoint (6 sec
after stimulus). I was just wondering what the numbers following the
# of estimates per condition row actually represented, and how I
could convert these to % signal change. I saw in an archived email
http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg00171.html
that someone mentioned taking those values, dividing by the baseline
offset value (row 4) and multiplying by 100 to get % signal change.
Is this a valid method?
Adam Nitenson, B.S.
Brain Genomics Lab
Massachusetts General Hospital
--
Thomas Janssens, PhD student
Laboratorium voor Neuro- en Psychofysiologie
K.U.Leuven Medical School
Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven (Belgium)
phone +32 16 33 00 35
cell phone +32 494 115 509
___
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
[Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label -f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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.
Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
usage: mris_anatomical_stats [options] subject name hemi [surface name] So, just end your command with the word 'pial'. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:09 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label - f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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
Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
Does the surface area calculated here include the non-cortical area along the medial wall ? Thank you very much. From: Michael Harms [mha...@conte.wustl.edu] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 5:24 PM To: Zhang, Yuning Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats usage: mris_anatomical_stats [options] subject name hemi [surface name] So, just end your command with the word 'pial'. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:09 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label - f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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
Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
you need to use the ?h.cortex.label with -l to exclude those areas. On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Does the surface area calculated here include the non-cortical area along the medial wall ? Thank you very much. From: Michael Harms [mha...@conte.wustl.edu] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 5:24 PM To: Zhang, Yuning Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats usage: mris_anatomical_stats [options] subject name hemi [surface name] So, just end your command with the word 'pial'. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:09 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label - f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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 ___ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
It'll be the surface area of whatever you specified by the -l flag -- in your case everything that is part of lh.cortex.label. You can view exactly what that includes on tksurfer. Doing so, you'll see that the non-cortical area along the medial wall is excluded. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 18:23 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Does the surface area calculated here include the non-cortical area along the medial wall ? Thank you very much. From: Michael Harms [mha...@conte.wustl.edu] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 5:24 PM To: Zhang, Yuning Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats usage: mris_anatomical_stats [options] subject name hemi [surface name] So, just end your command with the word 'pial'. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:09 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label - f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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
Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats
Thanks, it is really helpful !! best yuning From: Zhang, Yuning Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:23 PM To: Michael Harms Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: RE: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats Does the surface area calculated here include the non-cortical area along the medial wall ? Thank you very much. From: Michael Harms [mha...@conte.wustl.edu] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 5:24 PM To: Zhang, Yuning Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] calculate the surface area of pial surface using mris_anatomical_stats usage: mris_anatomical_stats [options] subject name hemi [surface name] So, just end your command with the word 'pial'. cheers, -MH On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:09 +, Zhang, Yuning wrote: Hi,experts, I am trying to get the total surface area of pial surface using the following command,but it seems the default surface for this command is white matter surface, is there any parameters i could change to get the information from pial surface ? mris_anatomical_stats -l lh.cortex.label - f /freesurfer/subjects_1/stats/lh.cortext.stats subjects_1 lh Thanks a lot best yuning ___ 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
[Freesurfer] tksurfer display
Dear Freesurfer experts I am new Freesurfer user, I used the command: tksurfer fsaverage lh inflated -annot aparc.annot In the graph showed in the window are only the vertices, not surface, see the figure in the attachment. how to displace the surface in the window, which operation do I need ? (I tried the differerent option in the manu ''View, and I didn't get the surface) Thank you very much Shugao attachment: snapshot.jpg___ 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] QDEC 5.0 with data from 4.x recon-all data
Hi, I was wondering if it were possible/advisable to use data processed and cached using earlier versions of FreeSurfe with the new 5.0 QDEC, since it has enhanced capabilities. Sincerely, Mira Mira Michelle Raman Scientific Programmer Center for Interdisciplinary Brain Sciences Research Stanford University ___ 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.
Re: [Freesurfer] QDEC 5.0 with data from 4.x recon-all data
yes, you may use v5 qdec with prior processed data. n. On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 21:04 +0200, Christian Scheel wrote: Dear Mira, I posted a similar question some days ago. It seems to be possible to use the new qdec version for the group analysis for data that has been processed and cached with version 4.x (at least 4.05 and newer). Check this posting in the mailing archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg15166.html Best wishes, Christian --- Christian Scheel University of Cologne Department of Psychiatry Am 30.09.2010 20:45, schrieb Mira Michelle Raman: Hi, I was wondering if it were possible/advisable to use data processed and cached using earlier versions of FreeSurfe with the new 5.0 QDEC, since it has enhanced capabilities. Sincerely, Mira Mira Michelle Raman Scientific Programmer Center for Interdisciplinary Brain Sciences Research Stanford University ___ 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 ___ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
