I mean; if you devide the number of vertices by the area per aparc-parcellation, some parcellations have relatively more vertices per mm^2 as others. If you now would compute the average thickness in for example the lobe-parcellation, the thicknesses of some areas (the parcellations with relatively more vertices per mm^2) get a higher weight in the overal average. Is that true?


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Douglas N Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
what do you mean? That the vertices are not uniform? mri_segstats just computes the mean over the parcellation without reference to non-uniformity.
doug



On 05/28/2013 02:15 PM, Martijn Steenwijk wrote:
Sorry, indeed, my reply was too quick. Seems to work, the results are similar to mri_anatomical_stats.

I'm not sure whether this is relevant; but the sampling seems to be not equally dense in the different regions. Does mri_segstats somehow cope with this?

Best,
Martijn

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Martijn Steenwijk <martijnsteenwijk@gmail.com <mailto:martijnsteenwijk@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Thanks Doug for your quick reply. But mri_segstats computes the
    average value inside the cortical region in the volume, right?
    That's not wat I want to have, I want to know the average value of
    the data in the volume on the wm/gm surface (i sampled with
    projfrac = 0).

    Any thoughts?



    On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Douglas N Greve
    <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote:


        I would use mri_segstats and specify the --annot option
        doug


        On 05/28/2013 01:28 PM, Martijn Steenwijk wrote:
        > Dear all,
        >
        > I've created a custom '.mgh' file containing values on the
        cortical
        > surface using mri_vol2surf. I would like to compute some
        statistics on
        > this surface in the aparc-areas computed by freesurfer. Can
        I then
        > just use  mri_anatomical_stats with option -t specifying the
        custom
        > mgh file as 'thickness' input? Or does mri_anatomical_stats
        something
        > more complex than just averaging the values inside each region?
        >
        > Best,
        > Martijn
        >
        >
        > _______________________________________________
        > 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
        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.