Hi Darko
what you are asking for is an unsolved problem in brain morphometry. We
try very hard to be insensitive/adaptive to MR sequence, but depending on
how big your acquisition differences are it is a very, very difficult
problem. Do you have the sam esubject(s) scanned on the different
protocols? That would at least let you evaulate the differences. And you
will certainly want to include site as a nuisance regressor in your final
analysis. I expect 6.0 is a bit better than 5.3 in this regard, but it is
an empirical question and will depeend on the details of your acquisition.
cheers
Bruce
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017, Darko Sarovic wrote:
Hi,
I’m doing volumetric analyses on MR structural data. The problem is that the
scanning has been done on different MR machines, as well as with different
sequences in some cases. This leads to different absolute values between
subjects for volumes and thicknesses when being run through the FreeSurfer
segmentation.
My questions regarding this are:
- Is there any way to standardize the results so that the
segmentations with different acquisition specs (different MR sequences, MR
machine developers) can be comparable?
- I have used v5.3.0 for my segmentations; Is any part of v6.0.0
improved in this regard so that using that version would give more
comparable results?
Regards,
Darko Sarovic
Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy
_______________________________________________
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.
