Hi all,
Ah, good to know that there is a Talairach accuracy problem. What have other groups been doing about this? Do you think it makes sense to manually edit much of our data? From what we've seen so far (registering to ages 3-9 so more errors expected) about 25% of our data have the registration sufficiently far off to push the TARGET volume (our subject's volume and the green lines in the pictures http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/FsTutorial/Talairach) outside of the skull.
Thanks,
-Eric
I think 5.1 specifically has a problem with Talairach accuracy (is that right Nick?). Should be much better with the next release
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Eric Cunningham wrote:
Hi Bruce,
I am running version 5.10
Thanks,
-Eric
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
wrote:
Hi Eric
what version are you running?
Bruce
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Eric Cunningham wrote:
Greetings,
I am trying to determine how bad a talairach.xfm
registration has to be to
warrant a manual edit. I have found that even minor
edits can have
noticable (9%) effects on major subcortical volumes
(such as thalamus or
hippocampus). Very few registrations seem to have
completely failed, but
most seem like they could be made better by a tweak
here or there. At what
point would I just be adding randomness by manually
editing?
About what percent of a given dataset would you
expect to manually edit?
Much appreciated,
-Eric Cunningham
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
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.