Hi there
If I wanted to compare some spatial probability maps of some sulci of interest with the Juelich Data provided by FreeSurfer, would it make more sense to use the unthresholded Brodmann areas or the .thresh ones? Based on my understanding of how the .thresh was created (by creating a surface area of the average BA label that best resembled the average surface area of the label from each individual hemisphere) in order to avoid including vertices that had a probability of 10%, for instance, I think using .thresh would be fine. However, I thought I would verify. In input would be greatly appreciated.
Best Trisanna -- Ph.D. Candidate McGill University Integrated Program in Neuroscience Psychology
I would use the versions where the group size approximately matched the individual size.
Peace,
Matt.
From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu on behalf of Trisanna Sprung-Much trisanna.sprung-much@mail.mcgill.ca Reply-To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 7:36 PM To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: [Freesurfer] Brodmann areas - exvivo labels
Hi there
If I wanted to compare some spatial probability maps of some sulci of interest with the Juelich Data provided by FreeSurfer, would it make more sense to use the unthresholded Brodmann areas or the .thresh ones? Based on my understanding of how the .thresh was created (by creating a surface area of the average BA label that best resembled the average surface area of the label from each individual hemisphere) in order to avoid including vertices that had a probability of 10%, for instance, I think using .thresh would be fine. However, I thought I would verify. In input would be greatly appreciated.
Best Trisanna -- Ph.D. Candidate McGill University Integrated Program in Neuroscience Psychology
_______________________________________________ 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.
yes, I agree with Matt. You need different thresholds for different areas (e.g. V1 vs. BA44) and picking one that on average gives you the right sized label seems reasonable
Bruce On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Matt Glasser wrote:
I would use the versions where the group size approximately matched the individual size.
Peace,
Matt.
From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu on behalf of Trisanna Sprung-Much trisanna.sprung-much@mail.mcgill.ca Reply-To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 7:36 PM To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: [Freesurfer] Brodmann areas - exvivo labels
Hi there
If I wanted to compare some spatial probability maps of some sulci of interest with the Juelich Data provided by FreeSurfer, would it make more sense to use the unthresholded Brodmann areas or the .thresh ones? Based on my understanding of how the .thresh was created (by creating a surface area of the average BA label that best resembled the average surface area of the label from each individual hemisphere) in order to avoid including vertices that had a probability of 10%, for instance, I think using .thresh would be fine. However, I thought I would verify. In input would be greatly appreciated.
Best Trisanna -- Ph.D. CandidateMcGill University Integrated Program in Neuroscience Psychology
_______________________________________________ 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.
Thanks for the speedy reply, Matt and Bruce! In that case I'll go with the .thresh for each Brodmann area.
Trisanna
-- Ph.D. Candidate McGill University Integrated Program in Neuroscience Psychology
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
yes, I agree with Matt. You need different thresholds for different areas (e.g. V1 vs. BA44) and picking one that on average gives you the right sized label seems reasonable
Bruce On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Matt Glasser wrote:
I would use the versions where the group size approximately matched the
individual size.
Peace,
Matt.
From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu on behalf of Trisanna Sprung-Much trisanna.sprung-much@mail.mcgill.ca Reply-To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 7:36 PM To: Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: [Freesurfer] Brodmann areas - exvivo labels
Hi there
If I wanted to compare some spatial probability maps of some sulci of interest with the Juelich Data provided by FreeSurfer, would it make more sense to use the unthresholded Brodmann areas or the .thresh ones? Based on my understanding of how the .thresh was created (by creating a surface area of the average BA label that best resembled the average surface area of the label from each individual hemisphere) in order to avoid including vertices that had a probability of 10%, for instance, I think using .thresh would be fine. However, I thought I would verify. In input would be greatly appreciated.
Best Trisanna -- Ph.D. CandidateMcGill University Integrated Program in Neuroscience Psychology
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.e du/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
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@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Matt Glasser -
Trisanna Sprung-Much