Hi all,
Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.
no, there are other differences as well.
Bruce On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all,
Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.
Alright, thanks. Would you recommend against using the new longitudinal stream with data generated from a previous version though? That is my main question.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
no, there are other differences as well.
Bruce
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all,
Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.
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/**compliancelinehttp://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.
Hi Erica,
I'm not sure what you mean. Why not just run it through all the way? And we would *strongly* recommend using the 5.1 longitudinal instead of 5.0
cheers Bruce On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Alright, thanks. Would you recommend against using the new longitudinal stream with data generated from a previous version though? That is my main question.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote: no, there are other differences as well.
BruceOn Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all, Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.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.
Hi Bruce,
We are working with a cohort of several hundred subjects, and all of the data has already been processed using the last version of FS. It would take quite a while for us to go through all of that data again, so we're trying to figure out if it would be okay to go ahead and use the longitudinal stream from 5.1 (sorry, not 5.0) using our current data, or if we really should, in fact, go back and start from scratch. Does that make sense? Sorry if I'm being unclear...
Erica
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
Hi Erica,
I'm not sure what you mean. Why not just run it through all the way? And we would *strongly* recommend using the 5.1 longitudinal instead of 5.0
cheers
Bruce On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Alright, thanks. Would you recommend against using the new longitudinal
stream with data generated from a previous version though? That is my main question.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
wrote: no, there are other differences as well.
BruceOn Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all, Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.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/**compliancelinehttp://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.
its ok to use just the longitudinal stream of 5.1 with your existing data. that is, you dont need to rerun the cross-sectional part of the three-stage longitudinal process, just -base stage and then the -long stage.
n.
Hi Bruce,
We are working with a cohort of several hundred subjects, and all of the data has already been processed using the last version of FS. It would take quite a while for us to go through all of that data again, so we're trying to figure out if it would be okay to go ahead and use the longitudinal stream from 5.1 (sorry, not 5.0) using our current data, or if we really should, in fact, go back and start from scratch. Does that make sense? Sorry if I'm being unclear...
Erica
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
Hi Erica,
I'm not sure what you mean. Why not just run it through all the way? And we would *strongly* recommend using the 5.1 longitudinal instead of 5.0
cheers
Bruce On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Alright, thanks. Would you recommend against using the new longitudinal
stream with data generated from a previous version though? That is my main question.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
wrote: no, there are other differences as well.
BruceOn Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all, Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.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/**compliancelinehttp://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
Great, thanks so much!
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Nick Schmansky nicks@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
its ok to use just the longitudinal stream of 5.1 with your existing data. that is, you dont need to rerun the cross-sectional part of the three-stage longitudinal process, just -base stage and then the -long stage.
n.
Hi Bruce,
We are working with a cohort of several hundred subjects, and all of the data has already been processed using the last version of FS. It would take quite a while for us to go through all of that data again, so we're
trying
to figure out if it would be okay to go ahead and use the longitudinal stream from 5.1 (sorry, not 5.0) using our current data, or if we really should, in fact, go back and start from scratch. Does that make sense? Sorry if I'm being unclear...
Erica
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
Hi Erica,
I'm not sure what you mean. Why not just run it through all the way? And we would *strongly* recommend using the 5.1 longitudinal instead of 5.0
cheers
Bruce On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Alright, thanks. Would you recommend against using the new longitudinal
stream with data generated from a previous version though? That is my main question.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
wrote: no, there are other differences as well.
BruceOn Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Erica Griffith wrote:
Hi all, Does anyone have experience running a longitudinal analysis in version 5.0, using .mgz files generated from the last version of freesurfer? My understanding is that the only major differences between the previous and current versions were in the longitudinal stream. Any input would be appreciated! Thanks.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<
http://www.partners.org/complianceline%3E.
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
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Erica Griffith -
Nick Schmansky