Hi Douglas,
Can I ask another question relating to an issue I ran into already a year ago? My lGI data were very smooth at the time (after smoothing for 10mm). I decided to use the unsmoothed data, since the fwmh is in the order of 10 then (according to the fwhm.dat file). My results are valid then, right? Just to check. For area and thickness I did smooth, resulting in comparable fwhm values.
Thanks,
Maaike
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 10:46:40 -0500 From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
On 2/8/15 1:48 PM, maaike rive wrote:
But how can i run the appropriate preprocessing and smoothing? The --X flag s not recognised using mris_preproc.
mri_preproc only uses the fsgd file to get the list of subjects to assure that they are ordered in the same way as when mri_glmfit builds the X matrix.
I used the same matrix as X in an FSGD file to do this now, it seems to work, but I do not no if it is correct. Furthermore, If I try to run mri_glmfit --sim for the lGI data, I get an error because fwmh66 is not available. I did not smooth the lGI data and with the DODS/DOSS FSGD models there was no problem, so does this mean my new models are not correct?
Wow, it is 66 without smoothing? I'm not sure what to tell you. The lGI is often very smooth, but that seems excessive. You can look for outliers by loading the y files as a "time coures" in tksurfer (-t flag). If it says at 66 then I don't think you can do the voxel-wise analysis. Was it that way when you used the FSGD file? It could be that your design matrix does not remove the mean offset, so check that too.
> From: r_maaike@hotmail.com
> Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 21:41:53 +0100
> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
>
> Ok, thanks!
> Maaike
>
> > Op 6 feb. 2015 om 17:49 heeft "Douglas N Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >
> > There is not a way to build more flexible models in the FSGD structure.
> > However, you can create your own design matrix and include anything you
> > want in it and pass it to mri_glmfit with --X instead of --fsgd.
> >
> > doug
> >
> >> On 02/05/2015 06:13 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >>
> >> I hope I'm not driving you crazy, but I have some additional questions
> >> regardig the DOSS/DODS models. Also because of the SPSS discrepancies.
> >>
> >> First, the model I discussed with you I used to assess diagn x age
> >> interactions, regressing out the effects of state and gender. However,
> >> in this model all interaction terms are incorporated. Is there a way
> >> to build the model only incorporating main effects of diagn, state,
> >> gender, age and diagn*age and diagn*state interactions? Since I do not
> >> expect any higher order interactions or state* age interactions, for
> >> instance (this is biologically not very plausible, although I did not
> >> formally test it).
> >>
> >> Second, for areas where there is no diagn*age interaction I want to
> >> use a model without any interaction term with age, so I was thinking
> >> to use DOSS (I still want to regress out the effects of age, so it was
> >> added as a regressor):
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> However, here there are still interaction terms with gender in the
> >> model. I do want to regress out the effects of gender (since I expect
> >> this to be a confounder), without incorporating the interaction term.
> >> How should I do this? The only solution I can think of is building a
> >> model with gender as additional regressor (containing 0 en 1) and
> >> using DOSS. So:
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> gender
> >>
> >> Does this make sense?
> >>
> >> Third, if so, it implies that for areas where there is no diagn*state
> >> interaction, and where I want to test diagn1 vs diagn2 (regressing out
> >> the effects of state, since I expect this to be a confounder), I
> >> should again build a new model:
> >>
> >> diagn1
> >>
> >> diagn2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> gender
> >>
> >> state
> >>
> >> I realize this is a lot of work, hence I hope you could give me
> >> any advice about this.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maaike@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 13:18:55 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >>
> >> Sorry, the statistician doesn't understand it yet; we're currently
> >> building freesurfer and SPSS models step by step to find out what's
> >> going on, but it's a litte time consuming... so, to be continued!
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maaike@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:55:27 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >> On second thought, I think the reason for the discrepancy is that I
> >> included state as a factor instead of covariate in the SPSS model. I
> >> ran the model again after having adjusted this and included every
> >> possible interaction; now I reach a p value of 0.009 (which is still
> >> different but at least significant). But I'll check again Monday!
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maaike@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:15:07 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >> I thought so, but I will check with the statistician next Monday, I'll
> >> get back to you as soon as I'm sure.
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:12:32 -0500
> >> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> Actually, that looks correct. Is this what you fed to SPSS?
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 2:07 PM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, I'm so sorry, I'm afraid I mixed things up. I indeed used
> >> DODS, and assumed these were may regressors:
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2*age
> >>
> >>
> >> However what I actually meant to do was testing for the effects of
> >> diagnosis and interactions (e.g. diagnosis*age) by using the
> >> appropriate contrasts, so I thought that if I used the contrast
> >> for the diagnosis*age interaction, I was testing whether or not
> >> this interaction was significant regressing out the effects of
> >> state and gender. Another example, I thought that if I used the
> >> contrast for diagnosis1 versus diagnosis2, I was testing wether or
> >> not there was a significant effect of diagnosis regressing out the
> >> effects of state, gender and age.
> >>
> >>
> >> But that is not the case than? How should I build the model to
> >> answer these questions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:33:40 -0500
> >> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> It depends on the actual covariates and whether you used DOSS or
> >> DODS. The default is DODS, which is a full interaction model.
> >> Assuming that state is a categorical variable with 2 levels, you'd
> >> have 4 regressors (gender by state) + 4 more regressors (gender by
> >> state by age). If the SPSS model did not have 8 regressors, then
> >> it is not the same.
> >>
> >> doug
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 1:26 PM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> How should I have described the model?
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:09:40 -0500
> >> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >>>>> I told him it the model is a GLM with age, gender and state
> >> as covariates
> >>
> >> This is not a sufficient description. Several design matrices
> >> could be derived from this description.
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 11:58 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> The p value from SPSS is 0.156. I checked with a
> >> statistician, just to be sure, but he says the SPSS model
> >> is correct... (he doesn't know anything about freesurfer
> >> and FSGD files, but I told him it the model is a GLM with
> >> age, gender and state as covariates).
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:46:37 -0500
> >> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> You should report the clusterwise p-value. The p-value
> >> that you have computed is not interpretable. If it did not
> >> come out significant, then it would be worrisome, but it
> >> is only a check and cannot be used for anything. What
> >> p-value did you get from SPSS? I'd be curious to know what
> >> the source of the descrpancy is since this has happened
> >> several times now.
> >>
> >> doug
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 3:25 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Douglas,
> >>
> >> I used the matlab code and the p value is signifiant,
> >> although less so than the p-value I get from the
> >> clusterwise statistics (0.0027 vs 0.00010). (Indeed I
> >> used an abs threshold for the clusterwise statistics).
> >>
> >> Which p-value should I report?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maaike@hotmail.com mailto:r_maaike@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:48:44 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>
> >> No not yet; I will do so!
> >>
> >>> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:44:33 -0500
> >>> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The t is correct. When the contrast matrix only has
> >> one row, then the F
> >>> is just an unsigned t. I don't know anything about
> >> SPSS so I can't tell
> >>> from what you have sent whether it is the same model
> >> or not. Try to get
> >>> SPSS to output the design matrix. Did you try the
> >> matlab code below?
> >>>
> >>>> On 01/29/2015 01:40 PM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>>> Hi Douglas,
> >>>>
> >>>> I checked but as far as I see it I used the same
> >> models. I attached
> >>>> the SPSS model and output as wel as the FSGD file
> >> and contrast file
> >>>> (to test a diagnosis x age interaction). Now that
> >> I come to think of
> >>>> it, I think the reason for the discrepant findings
> >> is that I used a
> >>>> t-contrast instead of an F-contrast for the
> >> interaction in Freesurfer.
> >>>> Apologies I did not think about this earlier. But
> >> maybe there is
> >>>> something else I did completely wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>>>
> >>>> If it is indeed the t vs F contrast, than how
> >> should I specify that
> >>>> the contrast is an F-contrast? Is it ok to just
> >> add another line to
> >>>> the contrastfile (so
> >>>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
> >>>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks again,
> >>>>
> >>>> Maaike
> >>>>
> >>>>> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:23:59 -0500
> >>>>> From: greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>>>> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We get these kind of reports occasionally. When
> >> I ask people to confirm
> >>>>> that they use exactly the same design matrix in
> >> SPSS, I never hear
> >>>> back,
> >>>>> so I assume that it gets resolved. So please
> >> check. The other thing you
> >>>>> can do is to run in matlab, something like
> >>>>>
> >>>>> cd glmdir/contrast
> >>>>> X = load('Xg.dat');
> >>>>> y = load('ocn.dat');
> >>>>> C = load('C.dat');
> >>>>> [beta rvar] = fast_glmfit(y,X);
> >>>>> [F p] = fast_fratio(beta,X,rvar,C);
> >>>>> p will be the p-value
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you used an unsigned cluster-forming
> >> threshold (ie, abs), then it is
> >>>>> possible that some of the voxels are pos and
> >> some are neg so that they
> >>>>> average out
> >>>>>
> >>>>> doug
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 01/26/2015 09:03 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>>>>> Dear Freesurfer experts,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sorry to bother you again, but I have two more
> >> questions about
> >>>>>> extracting (thickness/surface/GI) values from
> >> a certain cluster.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As I understood, the abs.y.ocn.dat file gives
> >> the average values
> >>>> for a
> >>>>>> given significant cluster (e.g. a cluster
> >> where there is a
> >>>> significant
> >>>>>> AxB interaction).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I may be completely misunderstanding things,
> >> but if I use these
> >>>> values
> >>>>>> in SPSS for further statistics and test the
> >> same interaction (AxB),
> >>>>>> than according to SPSS this interaction is
> >> /not /significant
> >>>>>> (corrected for the same covariates as in the
> >> FSGD file).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Could you tell me what is going wrong here? I
> >> do not trust my
> >>>> results now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Furthermore, is it possible (and if so, how?)
> >> to extract the average
> >>>>>> values of exactly the same cluster, but in an
> >> independent group not
> >>>>>> used in the analysis, for post-hoc comparisons
> >> in SPSS?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maaike
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>>>>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
> >>>>> MGH-NMR Center
> >>>>> greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>>>> Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> >>>>> Fax: 617-726-7422
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> >>>>> FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> >> www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >> http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >>>>> Outgoing:
> >> ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>>>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto: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
> >> mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
> >>> MGH-NMR Center
> >>> greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>> Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> >>> Fax: 617-726-7422
> >>>
> >>> Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> >>> FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> >>> www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >> http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >>> Outgoing:
> >> ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto: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 mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ Freesurfer
> >> mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto: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 mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ Freesurfer
> >> mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto: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 mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing
> >> list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> mailto: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 mailto: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.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ 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.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> > greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> > Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> > Fax: 617-726-7422
> >
> > Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> > FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> > www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> > Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
_______________________________________________ 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.