Dear Diederick,
were all subjects acquired at point 1 with 1.5T and at point 2 with 3T? Or was the same subject acquired with the same scanner at both timepoints? In the first case, could it be simply a problem of scanner-related variability of ICV assessment (different scanner different sequence parameters different performance in assessing ICV)? Regards, Paola Valsasina _____ Da: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] Per conto di Diederick Stoffers Inviato: lunedì 20 dicembre 2010 12.49 A: Freesurfer List Oggetto: [Freesurfer] ICV differs systematically in repeated measurements Hi all, I have a dataset with AD patients that were scanned twice, once at 1.5T and once at 3T at an interval of a few years. The ICV values are lower for almost all subjects at timepoint two (FS 5.0). Isn't ICV in the later FS versions supposed to be independent of brain volume as it is based on a scaling factor derived from the Tailairach transform of the skull? Many thanks! Cheers, Diederick ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOSTIENI ANCHE TU LA RICERCA DEL SAN RAFFAELE. NON C'E' CURA SENZA RICERCA. Per donazioni: ccp 42437681 intestato a Fondazione Arete' Onlus del San Raffaele. Per informazioni: tel. 02.2643.4461 - www.sanraffaele.org
_______________________________________________ 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.
