Hi Martin,

Thanks for your fast response. Apologies for the second email, I forgot to 
include the mailinglist.

It makes sense that in the longi-stream results should be more reliable.

However, it worries me if I see segmentation differences up to 500%, for 
example amygdala volume going from 1475 to 503 Left and 1595 to 281 for Right, 
independent vs longitudinal stream respectively.
In the current study we had a cross-sectional exploration study, followed by a 
longitudinal validation study (so two different samples). The above worries me 
if we want to compare the cross-sectional results with the longitudinal 
results, as the differences between independent and longitudinal are in a 
linear fashion.

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Cédric

From: Martin Reuter 
<mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>
Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 8:00 PM
To: Cédric Koolschijn 
<p.c.m.p.koolsch...@uva.nl<mailto:p.c.m.p.koolsch...@uva.nl>>
Cc: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>" 
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Differences on baseline volumes within subject 
cross-sectional vs longitudinal processing

Hi Cedric,

this is as expected, the data changes when using the longitudinal stream (it 
will become more reliable, removing some of the variance you get in the 
independent processing). Becuase of the different processing approaches, the 
results from independent processing (cross) and long will not be directly 
comparable.

Cheers, Martin


On 06/25/2013 04:02 AM, Koolschijn, Cédric wrote:
Hi FreeSurfers,

I ran the longitudinal processing pipeline on my subjects, FS 5.0.
Following the tutorial, first independently, then base, then long etc. 
Everything works well,  no problems there.

Out of curiosity I compared the asegstats & aparcstats within subject at 
baseline (i.e. The same timepoint): so the independent fsid vs the 
same_fsid.long.same_fsid_template, and there are (large) differences between 
all volumes/thicknesses. The independent measures are in almost all brain areas 
larger compared to those derived from the longi-stream. Except for the IC, 
which is completely the same, but of course, this measure is based on the 
Buckner method and calculated differently.

Overall this seems a bit strange to me, because I believe there shouldn't be 
differences within subject on the same time-point.
Is this the result of the within-subject template use for the longitudinal data 
or is something else going wrong, or is this normal?

Many thanks!

Cheers,
Cédric

------------------------------------------------------------
P.C.M.P. Koolschijn (Cédric), PhD
Dutch Autism & ADHD Research Center
Brain and Cognition
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
E p.c.m.p.koolsch...@uva.nl<mailto:p.c.m.p.koolsch...@uva.nl>
W http://www.dutcharc.nl




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


--
Martin Reuter, Ph.D.
Assistant in Neuroscience - Massachusetts General Hospital
Instructor in Neurology   - Harvard Medical School
MGH / HMS / MIT

A.A.Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging
149 Thirteenth Street, Suite 2301
Charlestown, MA 02129

Phone: +1-617-724-5652
Email:
   mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
   reu...@mit.edu<mailto:reu...@mit.edu>
Web  : http://reuter.mit.edu

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.

Reply via email to