External Email - Use Caution
Dear FreeSurfers,
I read that criticism about the thalamic nuclei segmentation based on T1-images was raised (DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119340https://secure-web.cisco.com/1V8gZgz38WZjYs0sX-xsLC9vnYMqApMNA_X1Jr2Efj69f_PXS1pgFAGBv1YAwZ6H1YLm6yRH5QnEw5rKyLcgK_qo2zzfLuRvgOyA2_gB05SHLcjfIjUnrDxKwRTisGrKAZkirFlb1KI5M8GVOqg-yil7b68sC42CRSeaKpkZLSsvYxn18xJYJos_1RnNzMow_e7Eeq5I_XeuDi48xWHzg7kXRQndvvH8Jzoq3Cgz1Z-8ASOj3OZ3nXhoHkWlgVpEDrSY_gPZVQPiv-QYkQM1UhODOXkVwdyIZLwFFCjIk1VOyLVdK8mw1Cqg41D1sGMOuhq8BlcTOJp0OY7TyfMGJ7w/https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1016%2Fj.neuroimage.2022.119340 and DOI: 10.1162/imag_a_00166https://secure-web.cisco.com/1HuYBMxn8grUwviyS1dIybnKr9s2bpABgLeHoaKYUZXVItxs7NIM4E03Fg73ECMHebtdzD4XEbg-oU-FKqrHqSrD3nnhJWKFIgU60pvSLCok8BT0RpLfNsDFBX-LuQlSk5zNkB3ccgbSW0sAh3Krs8nu2MN9r4REaCxCa-K5_C31WW1o51KPZXQaiSwTrldO1-_h_k5og_ukR2KxCe6vmTrnYxwukfBscHrHUsXVfzBDqVKnzNNOMbFBzX46hPRcwx9HgKkfPD9NTTzez0EZ5CMRszJUXJrhXmHx7XrMtsGlbeFD3_Q0cXAdL70GJStBP1-8qBHPEk2vXK0Uef1O2Xg/https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1162%2Fimag_a_00166) as overlaps with the Morel stereotactic atlas were not always satisfying. However, I was wondering whether the segmentations with the Morel atlas (registered to MNI space) of individual thalami can be considered a proper validation since individual variation of thalamic nuclei sizes are not taken into account and the atlas is not probabilistic.
Can someone elaborate on this criticism?
Thank you, Melissa