The native resolution of the other subjects is (1,1,1)mm voxel size and (256,256,160) voxels, whereas this subject is (0.7,0.7,0.8) mm voxel size and (288,288,165) voxels. Sorry that wasn't clear in my previous email. I'd appreciate any insight that anyone might be able to share.
Thanks, Tricia
--- On Wed, 3/9/11, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
From: Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Small voxel size To: "Tricia Merkley" tmerkle22@yahoo.com Cc: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2011, 5:01 PM
What is the resolution of your other subjects?
On Mar 9, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Tricia Merkley tmerkle22@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello,
One of our subjects was scanned with (0.7,0.7,0.8) mm voxel size, although all other acquisition parameters were the same as the other subjects. I'm wondering to what extent this might affect the results of the subcortical segmentation, cortical thickness measurements, etc., as compared to 1mm cubic voxels. When would it be appropriate to use the '-cm' flag for mri_convert?
Thanks, Tricia Merkley
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ 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.