I never heard anything on my post here, but it might just be high surface resolution:
http://www.mail-archive.com/neuro-mult-comp@brainvis.wustl.edu/msg00026.html
On 10/16/2009 09:58 AM, Michael Harms wrote:
Your FDR analysis sounds correct. You probably have a rather small number of "marginally" significant vertices, which is why none survive FDR. You could try increasing the "q" value from say 0.05 to 0.1, in which case 10% of the surviving vertices would be expected to be false positives.
cheers, Mike H.
On Fri, 2009-10-16 at 12:03 +0200, Yulia WORBE wrote:
Dear Freesurfer team,
We are currently doing a cortical thickness studies between a group of psychiatric patients (n=60) and controls (n=30). We tested several smoothing levels (15mm, 20mm, 25mm)
When setting an uncorrected threshold (such as p<0.005), we obtained several regions of decreased thickness, which are consistent with the pathology.
However, when trying to correct for multiple comparisons using FDR ("Set Using FDR" button in qdec), the computed threshold is very high (e.g. 4.3 for 20mm smoothing) and, obviously, no significant regions are left.
Did we do anything wrong in the analysis ?
Thank you very much for your help, Yulia
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