Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison?
Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question, then repost to the list. doug
On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi Amirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question, then repost to the list. doug
On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
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.
Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug
On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS?
On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,
then repost to the list. doug On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein ManzouriThe 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.
Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different? On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug
On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi Amirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,
then repost to the list.
doug
On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
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.
If you have two groups and a single covariate, when you run it with mri_glmfit create a contrast with [0 0 1 -1]. In QDEC, it will be one of the default contrasts (something like "do the two groups differ in slope?") doug
On 1/12/14 5:31 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different?
On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote: HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,then repost to the list. doug On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein ManzouriThe 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.
Hey All,
I am sorry to jump into this discussion. I know how to check the slope difference between groups. I want to ask help from you to confirm that if difference in thickness in some brain areas arising from (0 0 1 -1) happens, it means that there is a group * age interaction, right?
Then, the only option is DODS rather than DOSS. If no difference in thickness is found for this contrast, it means that there is no interaction. Then DOSS is more appropriate. Am I right?
Lickey
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Douglas Greve greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
If you have two groups and a single covariate, when you run it with mri_glmfit create a contrast with [0 0 1 -1]. In QDEC, it will be one of the default contrasts (something like "do the two groups differ in slope?") doug
On 1/12/14 5:31 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different? On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug
On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi Amirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,
then repost to the list.
doug
On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
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.
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.
If there is no interaction, then either DODS or DOSS is appropriate. DOSS will be more powerful and a little more interpretable. If there is an interaction then DODS must be used, and the interpretation of the difference between groups becomes more problematic. Eg, if age is the covariate, and there is an interaction, it means that there will be some age where the two best fit lines cross. At this point, there will be no difference between the groups. Far away from this point, there will be a difference. doug
On 01/13/2014 03:49 AM, yaya ya wrote:
Hey All,
I am sorry to jump into this discussion. I know how to check the slope difference between groups. I want to ask help from you to confirm that if difference in thickness in some brain areas arising from (0 0 1 -1) happens, it means that there is a group * age interaction, right?
Then, the only option is DODS rather than DOSS. If no difference in thickness is found for this contrast, it means that there is no interaction. Then DOSS is more appropriate. Am I right?
Lickey
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Douglas Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
If you have two groups and a single covariate, when you run it with mri_glmfit create a contrast with [0 0 1 -1]. In QDEC, it will be one of the default contrasts (something like "do the two groups differ in slope?") doug On 1/12/14 5:31 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different? On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote: Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote: HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,then repost to the list. doug On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein ManzouriThe 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._______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto: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.
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Dear Doug, I need also to correct for Age and Years of Education by using them as nuisance covariate. Would you please explain: Why the covariates should be demeaned? Is subtracting the mean from each individual the only way of demeaning? How Qdec regress out the effect of the covariates , linear or …? Thanks in advance,
Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Douglas N Greve greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
If there is no interaction, then either DODS or DOSS is appropriate. DOSS will be more powerful and a little more interpretable. If there is an interaction then DODS must be used, and the interpretation of the difference between groups becomes more problematic. Eg, if age is the covariate, and there is an interaction, it means that there will be some age where the two best fit lines cross. At this point, there will be no difference between the groups. Far away from this point, there will be a difference. doug
On 01/13/2014 03:49 AM, yaya ya wrote:
Hey All,
I am sorry to jump into this discussion. I know how to check the slope difference between groups. I want to ask help from you to confirm that if difference in thickness in some brain areas arising from (0 0 1 -1) happens, it means that there is a group * age interaction, right?
Then, the only option is DODS rather than DOSS. If no difference in thickness is found for this contrast, it means that there is no interaction. Then DOSS is more appropriate. Am I right?
Lickey
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Douglas Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
If you have two groups and a single covariate, when you run it with mri_glmfit create a contrast with [0 0 1 -1]. In QDEC, it will be one of the default contrasts (something like "do the two groups differ in slope?") doug On 1/12/14 5:31 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different? On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>wrote:
Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. doug On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote: HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC becausethere is a bug such that
it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent outan email
about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let peopleknow about a bug
once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, usemri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question,
then repost to the list. doug On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:Hello all, I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical thickness differences between groups having Age as nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS gives me completely different results. We have three groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. My question is which results design matrix type is more reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a covariate of interest in my comparison? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Amirhossein ManzouriThe 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._______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto: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.
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 greve@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/
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
On 01/13/2014 11:41 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote:
Dear Doug, I need also to correct for Age and Years of Education by using them as nuisance covariate. Would you please explain: Why the covariates should be demeaned?
Reduces correlation with the group term and so improves efficiency.
Is subtracting the mean from each individual the only way of demeaning?
As far as I know.
How Qdec regress out the effect of the covariates , linear or …?
Using multiple linear regression doug
Thanks in advance,
Best regards, Amirhossein Manzouri
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Douglas N Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
If there is no interaction, then either DODS or DOSS is appropriate. DOSS will be more powerful and a little more interpretable. If there is an interaction then DODS must be used, and the interpretation of the difference between groups becomes more problematic. Eg, if age is the covariate, and there is an interaction, it means that there will be some age where the two best fit lines cross. At this point, there will be no difference between the groups. Far away from this point, there will be a difference. doug On 01/13/2014 03:49 AM, yaya ya wrote: > Hey All, > > I am sorry to jump into this discussion. I know how to check the > slope difference between groups. I want to ask help from you to > confirm that if difference in thickness in some brain areas arising > from (0 0 1 -1) happens, it means that there is a group * age > interaction, right? > > Then, the only option is DODS rather than DOSS. If no difference in > thickness is found for this contrast, it means that there is no > interaction. Then DOSS is more appropriate. Am I right? > > Lickey > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Douglas Greve > <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>> wrote: > > > If you have two groups and a single covariate, when you run it > with mri_glmfit create a contrast with [0 0 1 -1]. In QDEC, it > will be one of the default contrasts (something like "do the two > groups differ in slope?") > doug > > > > On 1/12/14 5:31 AM, amirhossein manzouri wrote: >> >> Thanks Doug and how can check if the slopes are different? >> >> On Jan 12, 2014 12:33 AM, "Douglas Greve" >> <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>> wrote: >> >> >> Use DODS to test whether the slopes differ between the three >> groups. If they do not, then use DOSS. >> doug >> >> >> >> >> On 1/11/14 5:03 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Doug for the prompt reply. I just want to if DODS is >>> ok to be used in my case or I should use DOSS? >>> >>> On Jan 11, 2014 10:56 PM, "Douglas Greve" >>> <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> >>> <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> HiAmirhossein, don't use the DOSS feature in QDEC because there is a bug such that >>> it does not always do the right thing. Sorry, I sent out an email >>> about 8mo ago on this, but it is not easy to let people know about a bug >>> once the bug is out there. If you want to use DOSS, use mri_glmfit directly. If you still have a question, >>> >> >>> then repost to the list. >>> doug >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1/11/14 1:22 PM, amirhossein manzouri wrote: >>>> Hello all, >>>> I am using Qdec (version5.1) to study cortical >>>> thickness differences between groups having Age as >>>> nuisance covariate. I do not have assumption if the >>>> groups are different or not . Using DODS and DOSS >>>> gives me completely different results. We have three >>>> groups including 41, 39, and 24 subjects in each. >>>> My question is which results design matrix type is more >>>> reliable for such a study? And also what if I include a >>>> covariate of interest in my comparison? >>>> Thanks in advance, >>>> Best regards, >>>> Amirhossein Manzouri >>>> >>>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto: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. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer -- Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D. MGH-NMR Center greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Phone Number: 617-724-2358 <tel:617-724-2358> Fax: 617-726-7422 <tel:617-726-7422> Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting <http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting> FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2 www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html <http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html> Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/ _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
amirhossein manzouri -
Douglas Greve -
Douglas N Greve
-
yaya ya