It¡¯s because people have found empirically that surface area and volume are correlated with TIV, but thickness is notcheersHi Bruce,Thanks for your help. But I have a doubt in why we should do in this way? Are there any principles or mechanisms in Qdec?Sincerely,Zheng
At 2017-11-27 10:47:49, "Bruce Fischl" <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
YesHi Bruce,That is, I should set eTIV at Nuisance Factors for volume and surface area, not for thickness in qdec, is it right?
<qdec.PNG>
At 2017-11-27 10:22:05, "Bruce Fischl" <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: >you should correct for eTIV for volume (but not for thickness) >On Mon, 27 >Nov 2017, Ö£·ïÁ« wrote: > >> Hi Greve, >> Only for age and surface area, no thickness or volume, is it right? >> >> Thanks! >> Zheng >> >> >> >> >> At 2017-11-26 03:04:26, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: >> >> Yes, for age and surface area. >> >> >> On 11/23/17 2:05 AM, Ö£·ïÁ« wrote: >> Hi professors, >> >> I am using Qdec in Freesurfer. I want to study the relationships between age and >> cortical thickness, age and cortical volume, age and surface area. Is it necessary to >> corrected by eTIV for volume and surface area in Qdec? >> I am looking forward to your reply. >> >> Thanks, >> Zheng >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer