Hi Gabor,
it depends on what you are doing. What you describe is sufficient for maps/structure volumes, but for example if you wanted to measure thickness within parcels you would have to check the accuracy of the cortical parcellation
cheers Bruce
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016, Gabor Perlaki wrote:
Sorry to repost my question. I would appreciate any reply.
Best Regards, Gabor
2016-06-13 10:51 GMT+02:00 Gabor Perlaki petzinger.gabor@gmail.com: Dear all,
I've a lot of patients and we are looking for the fastest solution to check the output of Freesurfer. On the troubleshooting page (https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/FsTutorial/TroubleshootingData) there are a lot of steps to check, but I think not all of that should be done to find out whether there is error in the final segmentations. I think, but I am not sure, that checking the surfaces (white and pial) and checking the subcortical segmentations (aseg) is enough to realize if something is wrong. After an error is detected based on the checked outputs (surfaces and aseg), we can find out the exact nature of the error and correct it based on the troubleshooting page. Is it a good solution for verifying the performance of Freesurfer by checking only these two things (surfaces and aseg) or I need to check all of the steps listed on the troubleshooting page anyway?
Best Regards, Gabor
-- Gabor Perlaki research associate Diagnostic Center of Pécs H-7623 Pécs, Rét str. 2. Tel.: 0036-30-2084367 E-mail: petzinger.gabor@gmail.com