Best Regards, Donald McLaren
=================
D.G. McLaren, Ph.D.
Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and
Harvard Medical School
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA
Website: http://www.martinos.org/~mclaren
Office: (773) 406-2464
=====================
This e-mail contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION which may contain PROTECTED
HEALTHCARE INFORMATION and may also be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and which is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the
reader of the e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you are in possession of confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any
action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail
unintentionally, please immediately notify the sender via telephone at (773)
406-2464 or email.

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Martin Reuter <mreuter@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:

Hi Cedric,

this is as expected, the data changes when using the longitudinal stream (it will become more reliable, removing some of the variance you get in the independent processing). Becuase of the different processing approaches, the results from independent processing (cross) and long will not be directly comparable.

Cheers, Martin

On 06/25/2013 04:02 AM, Koolschijn, Cédric wrote:
Hi FreeSurfers,

I ran the longitudinal processing pipeline on my subjects, FS 5.0.

Following the tutorial, first independently, then base, then long etc. Everything works well, no problems there.

Out of curiosity I compared the asegstats & aparcstats within subject at baseline (i.e. The same timepoint): so the independent fsid vs the same_fsid.long.same_fsid_template, and there are (large) differences between all volumes/thicknesses. The independent measures are in almost all brain areas larger compared to those derived from the longi-stream. Except for the IC, which is completely the same, but of course, this measure is based on the Buckner method and calculated differently.

Overall this seems a bit strange to me, because I believe there shouldn't be differences within subject on the same time-point.

Is this the result of the within-subject template use for the longitudinal data or is something else going wrong, or is this normal?

Many thanks!

Cheers,

Cédric

------------------------------------------------------------

P.C.M.P. Koolschijn (Cédric), PhD

Dutch Autism & ADHD Research Center

Brain and Cognition
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
E P.C.M.P.Koolschijn@uva.nl
W http://www.dutcharc.nl
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
-- 
Martin Reuter, Ph.D.
Assistant in Neuroscience - Massachusetts General Hospital
Instructor in Neurology   - Harvard Medical School
MGH / HMS / MIT

A.A.Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging
149 Thirteenth Street, Suite 2301
Charlestown, MA 02129

Phone: +1-617-724-5652
Email: 
   mreuter@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
   reuter@mit.edu
Web  : http://reuter.mit.edu 
_______________________________________________
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.