External Email - Use Caution
Hello,
I am working on obtaining cortical thickness values for customized groups of ROIs. Currently, I extract thickness values for the standard set of ROIs using the following command: aparcstats2table --subjects [SUBJECT_ID] --hemi lh --meas thickness --tablefile lh_thickness.csv
However, I would like to compute the mean thickness for a specific anatomical region, such as the right cingulate lobe, which consists of the following ROIs:
- ctx-rh-caudalanteriorcingulate - ctx-rh-rostralanteriorcingulate - ctx-rh-isthmuscingulate - ctx-rh-posteriorcingulate
Does FreeSurfer provide a built-in feature to compute mean thickness for such grouped regions? If not, what would be the most methodologically sound approach? I considered computing a volume-weighted average thickness, but I would appreciate your insights on the best way to proceed.
Looking forward to your guidance.
Thanks,
Rohit
You can merge them together with a combination of mris_annotation2label to split the annotation into different labels, then merge the labels you want with mri_mergelabels, then use mris_anatomical_stats to compute a stats file. Alternatively, and probably easier, is just to compute an average of the labels listed below weighted by the number of vertices.
On 2/6/2025 1:21 AM, Rohitkumar DATCHANAMOURTY wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
Hello,
I am working on obtaining cortical thickness values for customized groups of ROIs. Currently, I extract thickness values for the standard set of ROIs using the following command:
|aparcstats2table --subjects [SUBJECT_ID] --hemi lh --meas thickness --tablefile lh_thickness.csv|
However, I would like to compute the mean thickness for a specific anatomical region, such as the *right cingulate lobe*, which consists of the following ROIs:
- |ctx-rh-caudalanteriorcingulate|
- |ctx-rh-rostralanteriorcingulate|
- |ctx-rh-isthmuscingulate|
- |ctx-rh-posteriorcingulate|
Does FreeSurfer provide a built-in feature to compute mean thickness for such grouped regions? If not, what would be the most methodologically sound approach? I considered computing a *volume-weighted average thickness*, but I would appreciate your insights on the best way to proceed.
Looking forward to your guidance.
Thanks,
*Rohit*
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu