Hi Douglas,
Can I ask another question relating to an issue I ran into already a year ago?
My lGI data were very smooth at the time (after smoothing for 10mm). I decided
to use the unsmoothed data, since the fwmh is in the order of 10 then
(according to the fwhm.dat file). My results are valid then, right? Just to
check. For area and thickness I did smooth, resulting in comparable fwhm values.
Thanks,
Maaike
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 10:46:40 -0500
From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
On 2/8/15 1:48 PM, maaike rive wrote:
But how can i run the appropriate preprocessing
and smoothing? The --X flag s not recognised using
mris_preproc.
mri_preproc only uses the fsgd file to get the list of subjects to
assure that they are ordered in the same way as when mri_glmfit
builds the X matrix.
I used the same matrix as X in an FSGD file to do
this now, it seems to work, but I do not no if it is correct.
Furthermore, If I try to run mri_glmfit --sim for the lGI
data, I get an error because fwmh66 is not available. I did
not smooth the lGI data and with the DODS/DOSS FSGD models
there was no problem, so does this mean my new models are not
correct?
Wow, it is 66 without smoothing? I'm not sure what to tell you. The
lGI is often very smooth, but that seems excessive. You can look for
outliers by loading the y files as a "time coures" in tksurfer (-t
flag). If it says at 66 then I don't think you can do the voxel-wise
analysis. Was it that way when you used the FSGD file? It could be
that your design matrix does not remove the mean offset, so check
that too.
> From: r_maa...@hotmail.com
> Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 21:41:53 +0100
> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per cluster
>
> Ok, thanks!
> Maaike
>
> > Op 6 feb. 2015 om 17:49 heeft "Douglas N Greve"
<gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >
> > There is not a way to build more flexible models
in the FSGD structure.
> > However, you can create your own design matrix and
include anything you
> > want in it and pass it to mri_glmfit with --X
instead of --fsgd.
> >
> > doug
> >
> >> On 02/05/2015 06:13 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >>
> >> I hope I'm not driving you crazy, but I have
some additional questions
> >> regardig the DOSS/DODS models. Also because of
the SPSS discrepancies.
> >>
> >> First, the model I discussed with you I used
to assess diagn x age
> >> interactions, regressing out the effects of
state and gender. However,
> >> in this model all interaction terms are
incorporated. Is there a way
> >> to build the model only incorporating main
effects of diagn, state,
> >> gender, age and diagn*age and diagn*state
interactions? Since I do not
> >> expect any higher order interactions or state*
age interactions, for
> >> instance (this is biologically not very
plausible, although I did not
> >> formally test it).
> >>
> >> Second, for areas where there is no diagn*age
interaction I want to
> >> use a model without any interaction term with
age, so I was thinking
> >> to use DOSS (I still want to regress out the
effects of age, so it was
> >> added as a regressor):
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> However, here there are still interaction
terms with gender in the
> >> model. I do want to regress out the effects of
gender (since I expect
> >> this to be a confounder), without
incorporating the interaction term.
> >> How should I do this? The only solution I can
think of is building a
> >> model with gender as additional regressor
(containing 0 en 1) and
> >> using DOSS. So:
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> gender
> >>
> >> Does this make sense?
> >>
> >> Third, if so, it implies that for areas where
there is no diagn*state
> >> interaction, and where I want to test diagn1
vs diagn2 (regressing out
> >> the effects of state, since I expect this to
be a confounder), I
> >> should again build a new model:
> >>
> >> diagn1
> >>
> >> diagn2
> >>
> >> age
> >>
> >> gender
> >>
> >> state
> >>
> >> I realize this is a lot of work, hence I hope
you could give me
> >> any advice about this.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maa...@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 13:18:55 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >>
> >> Sorry, the statistician doesn't understand it
yet; we're currently
> >> building freesurfer and SPSS models step by
step to find out what's
> >> going on, but it's a litte time consuming...
so, to be continued!
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maa...@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:55:27 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >> On second thought, I think the reason for the
discrepancy is that I
> >> included state as a factor instead of
covariate in the SPSS model. I
> >> ran the model again after having adjusted this
and included every
> >> possible interaction; now I reach a p value of
0.009 (which is still
> >> different but at least significant). But I'll
check again Monday!
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maa...@hotmail.com
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:15:07 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >> I thought so, but I will check with the
statistician next Monday, I'll
> >> get back to you as soon as I'm sure.
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:12:32 -0500
> >> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> Actually, that looks correct. Is this what you
fed to SPSS?
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 2:07 PM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, I'm so sorry, I'm afraid I mixed things
up. I indeed used
> >> DODS, and assumed these were may regressors:
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state1*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn1*state2*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state1*gender2*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender1*age
> >>
> >> diagn2*state2*gender2*age
> >>
> >>
> >> However what I actually meant to do was
testing for the effects of
> >> diagnosis and interactions (e.g.
diagnosis*age) by using the
> >> appropriate contrasts, so I thought that if I
used the contrast
> >> for the diagnosis*age interaction, I was
testing whether or not
> >> this interaction was significant regressing
out the effects of
> >> state and gender. Another example, I thought
that if I used the
> >> contrast for diagnosis1 versus diagnosis2, I
was testing wether or
> >> not there was a significant effect of
diagnosis regressing out the
> >> effects of state, gender and age.
> >>
> >>
> >> But that is not the case than? How should I
build the model to
> >> answer these questions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:33:40 -0500
> >> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> It depends on the actual covariates and
whether you used DOSS or
> >> DODS. The default is DODS, which is a full
interaction model.
> >> Assuming that state is a categorical variable
with 2 levels, you'd
> >> have 4 regressors (gender by state) + 4 more
regressors (gender by
> >> state by age). If the SPSS model did not have
8 regressors, then
> >> it is not the same.
> >>
> >> doug
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 1:26 PM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> How should I have described the model?
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:09:40 -0500
> >> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >>>>> I told him it the model is a GLM
with age, gender and state
> >> as covariates
> >>
> >> This is not a sufficient description. Several
design matrices
> >> could be derived from this description.
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 11:58 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> The p value from SPSS is 0.156. I checked with
a
> >> statistician, just to be sure, but he says the
SPSS model
> >> is correct... (he doesn't know anything about
freesurfer
> >> and FSGD files, but I told him it the model is
a GLM with
> >> age, gender and state as covariates).
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:46:37 -0500
> >> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >>
> >> You should report the clusterwise p-value. The
p-value
> >> that you have computed is not interpretable.
If it did not
> >> come out significant, then it would be
worrisome, but it
> >> is only a check and cannot be used for
anything. What
> >> p-value did you get from SPSS? I'd be curious
to know what
> >> the source of the descrpancy is since this has
happened
> >> several times now.
> >>
> >> doug
> >>
> >> On 1/30/15 3:25 AM, maaike rive wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Douglas,
> >>
> >> I used the matlab code and the p value is
signifiant,
> >> although less so than the p-value I get from
the
> >> clusterwise statistics (0.0027 vs 0.00010).
(Indeed I
> >> used an abs threshold for the clusterwise
statistics).
> >>
> >> Which p-value should I report?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Maaike
> >>
> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> From: r_maa...@hotmail.com
<mailto:r_maa...@hotmail.com>
> >> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:48:44 +0100
> >> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values per
cluster
> >>
> >> No not yet; I will do so!
> >>
> >>> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:44:33 -0500
> >>> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average values
per cluster
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The t is correct. When the contrast matrix
only has
> >> one row, then the F
> >>> is just an unsigned t. I don't know
anything about
> >> SPSS so I can't tell
> >>> from what you have sent whether it is the
same model
> >> or not. Try to get
> >>> SPSS to output the design matrix. Did you
try the
> >> matlab code below?
> >>>
> >>>> On 01/29/2015 01:40 PM, maaike rive
wrote:
> >>>> Hi Douglas,
> >>>>
> >>>> I checked but as far as I see it I
used the same
> >> models. I attached
> >>>> the SPSS model and output as wel as
the FSGD file
> >> and contrast file
> >>>> (to test a diagnosis x age
interaction). Now that
> >> I come to think of
> >>>> it, I think the reason for the
discrepant findings
> >> is that I used a
> >>>> t-contrast instead of an F-contrast
for the
> >> interaction in Freesurfer.
> >>>> Apologies I did not think about this
earlier. But
> >> maybe there is
> >>>> something else I did completely wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>>>
> >>>> If it is indeed the t vs F contrast,
than how
> >> should I specify that
> >>>> the contrast is an F-contrast? Is it
ok to just
> >> add another line to
> >>>> the contrastfile (so
> >>>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
> >>>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks again,
> >>>>
> >>>> Maaike
> >>>>
> >>>>> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:23:59
-0500
> >>>>> From: gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>>>> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] average
values per cluster
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We get these kind of reports
occasionally. When
> >> I ask people to confirm
> >>>>> that they use exactly the same
design matrix in
> >> SPSS, I never hear
> >>>> back,
> >>>>> so I assume that it gets resolved.
So please
> >> check. The other thing you
> >>>>> can do is to run in matlab,
something like
> >>>>>
> >>>>> cd glmdir/contrast
> >>>>> X = load('Xg.dat');
> >>>>> y = load('ocn.dat');
> >>>>> C = load('C.dat');
> >>>>> [beta rvar] = fast_glmfit(y,X);
> >>>>> [F p] =
fast_fratio(beta,X,rvar,C);
> >>>>> p will be the p-value
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you used an unsigned
cluster-forming
> >> threshold (ie, abs), then it is
> >>>>> possible that some of the voxels
are pos and
> >> some are neg so that they
> >>>>> average out
> >>>>>
> >>>>> doug
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 01/26/2015 09:03 AM, maaike
rive wrote:
> >>>>>> Dear Freesurfer experts,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sorry to bother you again, but
I have two more
> >> questions about
> >>>>>> extracting
(thickness/surface/GI) values from
> >> a certain cluster.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As I understood, the
abs.y.ocn.dat file gives
> >> the average values
> >>>> for a
> >>>>>> given significant cluster
(e.g. a cluster
> >> where there is a
> >>>> significant
> >>>>>> AxB interaction).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I may be completely
misunderstanding things,
> >> but if I use these
> >>>> values
> >>>>>> in SPSS for further statistics
and test the
> >> same interaction (AxB),
> >>>>>> than according to SPSS this
interaction is
> >> /not /significant
> >>>>>> (corrected for the same
covariates as in the
> >> FSGD file).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Could you tell me what is
going wrong here? I
> >> do not trust my
> >>>> results now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Furthermore, is it possible
(and if so, how?)
> >> to extract the average
> >>>>>> values of exactly the same
cluster, but in an
> >> independent group not
> >>>>>> used in the analysis, for
post-hoc comparisons
> >> in SPSS?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maaike
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
_______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>>>>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
> >>>>> MGH-NMR Center
> >>>>> gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>>>> Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> >>>>> Fax: 617-726-7422
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bugs:
surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> >>>>> FileDrop:
https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> >>
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >>
<http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html>
> >>>>> Outgoing:
> >>
ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
_______________________________________________
> >>>>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>>>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto: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 mailing list
> >>>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
> >>> MGH-NMR Center
> >>> gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>> Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> >>> Fax: 617-726-7422
> >>>
> >>> Bugs:
surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> >>> FileDrop:
https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> >>>
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> >>
<http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html>
> >>> Outgoing:
> >>
ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >>>
> >>>
_______________________________________________
> >>> Freesurfer mailing list
> >>> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________
> >> Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto: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 mailing list
> >> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer
> >> mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto: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 mailing list
> >> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer
> >> mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto: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 mailing list
> >> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer
mailing
> >> list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >> <mailto: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 mailing list
> >> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________ 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
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
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
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 mailing list
> >> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
> >
> > --
> > Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
> > MGH-NMR Center
> > gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> > Phone Number: 617-724-2358
> > Fax: 617-726-7422
> >
> > Bugs:
surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
> > FileDrop:
https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
> >
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
> > Outgoing:
ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freesurfer mailing list
> > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> >
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freesurfer mailing list
> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
_______________________________________________
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 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.
