Jeff,
Yes, you would only want to take it from the aseg.stats. I believe this is
fixed or on the list to be fixed for future versions.
Allison
--
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Jeff Sadino wrote:
> bump :)
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Jeff Sadino
jsadino.queens@gmail.comwrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> When I look at the BrainSegVol and BrainSegVolNotVent in wmparc.stats, the
>> values are around 200,000 - 300,000. However, when I look at the same
>> measures in aseg.stats, the values are around 1.1L - 1.5L. When I sum up
>> the individual ROIs in wmparc, it comes out to >1L. I am currently using
>> freesurfer 4.3.1. When I look at the aseg.stats files from freesurfer
>> 3.0.5, ran on the same subjects, the values are up around that 1 - 1.5L
>> range. This is consistent across all of our subjects: > 100 and from two
>> different scanners at two locations.
>>
>> From my wmparc file:
>> # Measure BrainMask, BrainMaskNVox, Number of Brain Mask Voxels, 1774481,
>> unitless
>> # Measure BrainMask, BrainMaskVol, Brain Mask Volume, 1774481.000000, mm^3
>> # Measure BrainSegNotVent, BrainSegVolNotVent, Brain Segmentation Volume
>> Without Ventricles, 243312.000000, mm^3
>> # Measure BrainSeg, BrainSegNVox, Number of Brain Segmentation Voxels,
>> 275688, unitless
>> # Measure BrainSeg, BrainSegVol, Brain Segmentation Volume, 275688.000000,
>> mm^3
>> # Measure IntraCranialVol, ICV, Intracranial Volume, 1302696.178406, mm^3
>>
>>
>> My question is why would wmparc so severely underestimate the BrainSegVol
>> measure? If I can not fix it, should I take the BrainSegVol from the
>> aseg.stats file?
>>
>> Thank you!
>> Jeff Sadino
>>
>