Hi Bruce,
It's OK. Thank you very much for your reply ! I will find it in other way.
Sincerely,
Zheng
At 2017-11-23 11:37:37, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
Sorry, I don’t remember. You can search on the wiki or maybe someone else will
chime in
Bruce
On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:30 PM, 郑凤莲 <13181786...@163.com> wrote:
Hi Bruce,
Could tell me which is the whole brain volume,please? I'm not sure which is
right. I need your help.
Thanks very much.
Zheng
At 2017-11-22 11:07:36, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>no, eTIV is the estimated volume of the intracranial vault, so it
>included sulcal CSF. I think we include a whole brain volume in the
>aseg.stats file that you can use, although I don't remember what it's
>called
>
>cheers
>Bruce
>On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, 郑凤莲 wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruce,
>> Thank you very much. I will try it. And I have another question. I also
>> want to study the
>> relation between age and the whole brain volume, gray matter volume and
>> white matter volume. The
>> whole brain volume is the same as eTIV, is right?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Zheng
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 2017-11-22 10:29:43, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> >you would include it as a nuisance variable in the glm
>> >On Wed, 22 Nov 2017,
>> >郑凤莲 wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for your quick reply. These results are not correted by eTIV,
>> >> If eTIV are corrected,
>> I
>> >> can only get the p value and scatter plot, I can't get the line trend. Do
>> >> you know how to get the
>> >> line trend with eTIV corrected as these results?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Zheng
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 在 2017-11-22 10:14:16，"Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> 写道：
>> >> >is this eTIV corrected? I would look at some of the outliers and make
>> >> >sure that the segmentations are accurate. Certainly the trend is in the
>> >> >correct (and depressing) direction.
>> >> >
>> >> >cheers
>> >> >Bruce
>> >> >On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, 郑凤莲 wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks for your advice. There are a part of the result. Blue color
>> >> >> stands women, and Red c
>> olo
>> >> r
>> >> >> stands men.
>> >> >> The number of the data is not enough large. Are they ok? May I use
>> >> >> them in my paper?
>> >> >> [IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE]
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks a lot !
>> >> >> Zheng
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At 2017-11-20 10:15:49, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >Hi Zheng
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I would scatter plot age vs. volume, coloring men and women
>> >> >> >differently
>> >> >> >(or different symbols) with and without eTIV correction to get an
>> >> >> >idea of
>> >> >> >what is going on
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >cheers
>> >> >> >Bruce
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >On Mon, 20 Nov
>> >> >> >2017, 郑凤莲 wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> My data is loss from 35 to 40. But the uniform of sex is not
>> >> >> >> well from 40 to 55 and from
>> 56
>> >> to
>> >> >> >> 71. I did the correlation analysis between age and volume. I don't
>> >> >> >> know how I can explain t
>> his
>> >> >> >> problem.
>> >> >> >> Thanks again.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Sincerely,
>> >> >> >> Zheng
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> At 2017-11-20 09:35:45, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >Hi Zheng
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >how uniform is your distribution? I'm hardly an expert on this,
>> >> >> >> >but I
>> >> >> >> >wouldn't expect very large effects until you get into the older
>> >> >> >> >end of
>> >> >> >> >that range. Have you scatter plotted your data?
>> >> >> >> >Bruce
>> >> >> >> >On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, 郑凤莲
>> >> >> >> >wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Thank you for your help.
>> >> >> >> >> I have 54 subjects, aged from 21 to 71 and only one group.
>> >> >> >> >> I want to compare the ch
>> ang
>> >> e o
>> >> >> f
>> >> >> >> >> hippocampus volume with age. The results before and after doing
>> >> >> >> >> the correction for eTIV
>> are
>> >> th
>> >> >> e
>> >> >> >> >> same. Where is wrong? Or if there is no error, how can I explain
>> >> >> >> >> it in discussion?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> >> >> Zheng
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> At 2017-11-20 04:55:49, "Bruce Fischl"
>> >> >> >> >> <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >Hi Zheng
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >yes, I see. Maybe the effect is smaller than you have the power
>> >> >> >> >> >to see, or
>> >> >> >> >> >there is no effect? You would need to give us more details for
>> >> >> >> >> >us to help.
>> >> >> >> >> >Are you correcting for eTIV? What measure are you comparing?
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >cheers
>> >> >> >> >> >Bruce
>> >> >> >> >> > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, 郑凤莲 wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> I am sorry for this situation.
>> >> >> >> >> >> In the first way, there was an statistical difference in
>> >> >> >> >> >> left hippocampus, but n
>> o d
>> >> iff
>> >> >> ere
>> >> >> >> nce
>> >> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> right hippocampus. In the second way, there was both no
>> >> >> >> >> >> statistical difference in lef
>> t o
>> >> r
>> >> >> >> >> >> right hippocampus. I don't know what causes this result.
>> >> >> >> >> >> Can you understand me this time?
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> >> >> >> Zheng
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> At 2017-11-18 22:58:56, "Bruce Fischl"
>> >> >> >> >> >> <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Hi Zheng
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >no difference between what and what?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >cheers
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Bruce
>> >> >> >> >> >> >On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, 郑凤莲 wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi professor,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> I am using Freesurfer for DTI data. When I run
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 'mri_segstats', I
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> got the result that there w
>> >> >> >> >> >> as
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> an obvious difference in left hippocampus, but no
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> difference in right hippocampus.
>> Th
>> >> en,
>> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> run
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> segmentation of hippocampus subfields. The result showed
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> there is no difference in
>> to
>> >> tal
>> >> >> le
>> >> >> >> ft
>> >> >> >> >> or
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> right hippocampus, and only in two right hippocampus
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> subfields has significant dif
>> fer
>> >> enc
>> >> >> e.
>> >> >> >> Why
>> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> there inconsistent result in two means?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thank you very much.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sincerely,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Zheng
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
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.
