Hey, I found the results (volume of V1) with mri_label2vol in FS 4.5 is different the one in BA.stats from FS 5.o? Do they use the same method or not? Which one is more reliable? Thanks.
All the best Meng
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 15:28:44 -0500 From: Douglas N Greve greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] label to volume To: Adil Javed ajcns@yahoo.com Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Message-ID: 4D6EA87C.9090706@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Adil, try using mri_label2vol. Run it with --help to get docs doug
Hi Meng,
I think one was based on ex vivo MRI and the other was based on histology, so on different subjects would account for some variability. They are both quite reliable.
cheers Bruce
On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, leemon albert wrote:
Hey, I found the results (volume of V1) with mri_label2vol in FS 4.5 is different the one in BA.stats from FS 5.o? Do they use the same method or not? Which one is more reliable? Thanks.
All the best Meng
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 15:28:44 -0500 From: Douglas N Greve greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] label to volume To: Adil Javed ajcns@yahoo.com Cc: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Message-ID: 4D6EA87C.9090706@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Adil, try using mri_label2vol. Run it with --help to get docs doug
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
leemon albert