Hi Elijah, can you repost with previous correspondence included? We get a lot of emails here and can't keep track of each person's issue. thanks!

doug

On 11/11/2016 08:06 PM, Elijah Mak wrote:

Hi,

A bit more info: the stack of thickness maps consists of lh.thickness.fwhm15.fsaverage.mghs that were created after -qcache. I used mri_concat --f --o to create the stack of mghs. I also noticed that the vertex values are in the range of 20-30, whereas those in the lh.thickness.fsvaerage mghs are in the expected range.

Should I be using this for the calculation of the thickness in the clusters instead?

Best Wishes, Elijah

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Elijah Mak <fkm24@medschl.cam.ac.uk mailto:fkm24@medschl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:

Thanks, Doug.

It works but I am not sure if the values I'm getting are correct.
Is this supposed to be reporting the mean cortical thickness of
each cluster? I have pasted the output below from the avgwf
below.  The names of the clusters correspond to the regions from
the "summary" text, am I right?


Group 	lh_fusiform 	lh_precentral 	lh_insular 	lh_precuneus
lh_parsorbitalis
1 	24.29454 	29.53935 	14.24736 	28.97924 	31.54577
1 	25.68872 	28.26156 	17.47828 	28.20604 	30.38902
2 	25.46281 	30.75879 	19.34943 	29.59019 	32.0404
2 	25.55514 	27.23871 	17.27937 	29.14274 	29.75657


Another related question: Is it possible to simply take the mean
cortical thickness across the voxels exceeding p<0.001 from the
uncorrected sig.mgh?

Thanks again!

Best Wishes,
Elijah

--

Elijah Mak, Gates Scholar

PhD Candidate *|* Psychiatry

University of Cambridge

Trinity College, Cambridge, CB2 1TQ

---

Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer