Dear Douglas, attached you´ll find the two y.fsgd file from the analysis run in GLM_FIT. the results are completely different (the z-score converted age produces a believable result, while the result correcting with raw age scores seems completely wrong.
best regards
Olof
Just my two cents:
I think the age should be mean-centered; otherwise, the meaning of the other variables need to be interpreted as age = 0 (rather than mean age = 0).
In general, I believe in qdec or mri_glmfit, the effects of Class variable are interpreted as 0 on the continuous/nuisance variables.
Best, Daniel
-- Yung-Jui "Daniel" Yang, PhD Postdoctoral Researcher Yale Child Study Center New Haven, CT (203) 737-5454
On 9/11/13 1:13 PM, "Erik Lindberg" <erikoloflindberg@gmail.commailto:erikoloflindberg@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Douglas, attached you´ll find the two y.fsgd file from the analysis run in GLM_FIT. the results are completely different (the z-score converted age produces a believable result, while the result correcting with raw age scores seems completely wrong.
best regards
Olof
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Erik Lindberg -
Yang, Daniel