Is correct the statement below?
FreeSurfer implementation of cortical surface-based analysis is distinct from other surface-based algorithms and conventional volume based morphometry with atlas mapping, as it does not necessarily depend on smoothing or matching to an atlas.
Thanks in advance,
Pedro Paulo Jr
Hi Pedro,
no, not quite. There are various atlases we use at different points, and we impose smoothness constraints on the surfaces.
cheers, Bruce On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Pedro Paulo Oliveira Jr wrote:
Is correct the statement below?
FreeSurfer implementation of cortical surface-based analysis is distinct from other surface-based algorithms and conventional volume based morphometry with atlas mapping, as it does not necessarily depend on smoothing or matching to an atlas.
Thanks in advance,
Pedro Paulo Jr
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Hi, I just had a question regarding the statistics in ?h.aparc.stats. I'm interested in calculating average thicknesses for several labels combined, and wanted to verify how to do that correctly. The way the stat files are calculated, would it be valid to simply take an average of the listed average thicknesses, weighted by the listed surface areas?
Thanks,
-Aaron-
Hi Aaron,
weighting by the surface area would be the right thing to do I think.
Bruce On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Goldman, Aaron (NIH/NIMH) [C] wrote:
Hi, I just had a question regarding the statistics in ?h.aparc.stats. I'm interested in calculating average thicknesses for several labels combined, and wanted to verify how to do that correctly. The way the stat files are calculated, would it be valid to simply take an average of the listed average thicknesses, weighted by the listed surface areas?
Thanks,
-Aaron-
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Goldman, Aaron (NIH/NIMH) [C] -
Pedro Paulo Oliveira Jr