Dear Freesurfers.
I am facing a crucial point.:)and I need your help.
After examining most of our subjects, we decided that there is no need to run all the procedures- work flow, since our data is not prone to too many failures, and just start with recon-all-all, get all the data and then start editing. Usually we have to add very few cp and to do some pial edits (not in all the cases).However, our talairach looks good, no skull striping problems and wm is also ok.
I was wondering if running recon-all-all, and then fixing the i.e. cp , or the pial surface when repeating autorecon2-cp, or autorecon2-pial-autorecon3, is it harmful? Does this mass my analysis , or it's ok?
Thank You Sharon
Hi Sharon,
that's good to hear :). Yes, that's the way we run our analysis also these days. With reasonable quality data there are very few failures and it's not worth the time to check stuff if you have a lot of sets to get through (although you should always check things at the end of course).
cheers, Bruce
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Sharon Ruso wrote:
Dear Freesurfers.
I am facing a crucial point.:)and I need your help.
After examining most of our subjects, we decided that there is no need to run all the procedures- work flow, since our data is not prone to too many failures, and just start with recon-all-all, get all the data and then start editing. Usually we have to add very few cp and to do some pial edits (not in all the cases).However, our talairach looks good, no skull striping problems and wm is also ok.
I was wondering if running recon-all-all, and then fixing the i.e. cp , or the pial surface when repeating autorecon2-cp, or autorecon2-pial-autorecon3, is it harmful? Does this mass my analysis , or it's ok?
Thank You Sharon
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Sharon Ruso