18 Mar
2013
18 Mar
'13
2:47 p.m.
Hi Ashley
I think including them would potentially bias your results if for example more of your scans with T2s were controls or some such.
cheers Bruce On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ashley Shurick wrote:
Hi all, I have a similar question: My T2 scans are similar to Nicola's - approximately .86 x .86 x 4.5mm. However, about 60/168 subjects don't have T2 scans. Would you recommend including the T2's for the subjects who have them, or excluding the T2 scans altogether?
Thank you in advance for your help!
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote: Hi Nicola
the T2 might in 5.2, but it is pretty thick slices so might hurt more than it helps. Not sure, but you can try it out cheers Bruce On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Nicola Toschi wrote: > Hello List, > > on out 3T scanner, in addition to MPRAGE images (1 mm^3), we usually > acquire T2 and PD images - however they are at 1x1x5 mm resolution. > > Would you recommend passing these (T2+PD) to the recon-all stream anyway > - would they add value/accuracy to the segmentation/parcellation (or > would they possibly decrease accuracy)? > > Thanks in advance, > > Nicola > > _______________________________________________ > 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 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.-- Ashley A. ShurickGraduate Student, Psychology Stanford University