Hi Doug,

I am not sure if this is the correct way to reply to the thread. I thought that adding a "RE:" in front of the subject would automatically link the email to its orginal thread. 
I hope this works!

I am pasting the previous emails below.

Thanks again, Doug.

Hi Elijah, can you repost with previous correspondence included? We get 
a lot of emails here and can't keep track of each person's issue. thanks!
doug


On 11/11/2016 08:06 PM, Elijah Mak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A bit more info: the stack of thickness maps consists of 
> lh.thickness.fwhm15.fsaverage.mghs that were created after -qcache. I 
> used mri_concat --f --o to create the stack of mghs.  I also noticed 
> that the vertex values are in the range of 20-30, whereas those in the 
> lh.thickness.fsvaerage mghs are in the expected range.
>
> Should I be using this for the calculation of the thickness in the 
> clusters instead?
>
> Best Wishes,
> Elijah
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Elijah Mak <fk...@medschl.cam.ac.uk 
> <mailto:fk...@medschl.cam.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks, Doug.
>
>     It works but I am not sure if the values I'm getting are correct.
>     Is this supposed to be reporting the mean cortical thickness of
>     each cluster? I have pasted the output below from the avgwf
>     below.  The names of the clusters correspond to the regions from
>     the "summary" text, am I right?
>
>
>     Group     lh_fusiform     lh_precentral   lh_insular      lh_precuneus
>     lh_parsorbitalis
>     1         24.29454        29.53935        14.24736        28.97924        
> 31.54577
>     1         25.68872        28.26156        17.47828        28.20604        
> 30.38902
>     2         25.46281        30.75879        19.34943        29.59019        
> 32.0404
>     2         25.55514        27.23871        17.27937        29.14274        
> 29.75657
>
>
>     Another related question: Is it possible to simply take the mean
>     cortical thickness across the voxels exceeding p<0.001 from the
>     uncorrected sig.mgh?
>
>     Thanks again!
>
>     Best Wishes,
>     Elijah
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Elijah Mak, Gates Scholar
>
> PhD Candidate *|* Psychiatry
>
> University of Cambridge
>
> Trinity College, Cambridge, CB2 1TQ
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freesurfer mailing list
> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

-- 
Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
MGH-NMR Center
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Phone Number: 617-724-2358
Fax: 617-726-7422

Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

Re: [Freesurfer] Extracting structural measures from trend-level PET clusters

Douglas N Greve Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:22:06 -0800

You can just


mri_segstats --i thickness.stack.mgh --seg cache.th30.pos.sig.ocn.nii.gz 

--excludeid 0 --avgwf thickness.stack.cluster.dat

Each row in thickness.stack.cluster.dat will be a subject, and each 

column is a cluster




On 11/09/2016 04:16 PM, Elijah Mak wrote:

> Hi Freesurfer Team,

>

> 1) We've found some subtle differences in tau accumulation between two 

> groups. Unfortunately, it does not survive mri_glmfit-sim (voxel 

> threshold 0.001, cwp < 0.05). Still, I would like to extract the 

> structural measures from the uncorrected tau clusters (p<0.001). What 

> is the most convenient approach for this?

>

> Could the following URL 

> (http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg16268.html 

> <http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg16268.html>

> ) be a solution? Can mri_label2label work for sig.mgh with multiple 

> clusters?

>

> 2) A slightly unrelated question: how can I go about using this 

> particular cluster as a seed for functional or tractography analysis 

> in other softwares (i.e. FSL or MRTRIX) or even within Freesurfer if 

> possible?

>

> Thanks again. Really appreciate your help