gt;longitudinal analysis?
>>
>>Is it because for linear mixed effects models analysis you need a base
>>template for each time point?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Sarah
>>____
>>From: Sarah Whittle
>>Sent: Frida
: Nick Schmansky; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>Subject: RE: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
>
>Ok, thank you.
>
>From: Martin Reuter [mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu]
>Sent: Friday, 22 March 2013 12:36 AM
>To: Sarah Whittle
>Cc:
Sarah
From: Sarah Whittle
Sent: Friday, 22 March 2013 6:50 AM
To: Martin Reuter
Cc: Nick Schmansky; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
Ok, thank you.
From: Martin Reuter
Ok, thank you.
From: Martin Reuter [mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu]
Sent: Friday, 22 March 2013 12:36 AM
To: Sarah Whittle
Cc: Nick Schmansky; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
Hi Sarah,
you
ome kind of IF THEN statements to
> run these commands separately or individuals that have had 1, 2 or 3 scans?
>
> Is there a simpler way of doing this though?? I feel like we're making things
> more complicated than they need to be!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sarah
>
>
&g
t: Thursday, 7 March 2013 10:22 AM
To: Sarah Whittle
Cc: Nick Schmansky; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
Hi Sarah,
you deal with the time during post-processing (statistical analysis).
Yes, you have differently many rows for each subject.
Yea
Thanks very much!
From: Martin Reuter [mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu]
Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2013 10:22 AM
To: Sarah Whittle
Cc: Nick Schmansky; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
Hi Sarah,
you
___
> From: Martin Reuter [mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2013 5:41 AM
> To: Nick Schmansky
> Cc: Sarah Whittle; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
>
> Hi Sara,
>
> yes, should
>
> De: Sarah Whittle
>Para: Martin Reuter ; Nick Schmansky
>
>CC: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"
>Enviado: Miércoles 6 de marzo de 2013 17:17
>Asunto: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
>
>Thanks Martin and Nick,
>
>We have a
ks,
Sarah
From: Martin Reuter [mreu...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu]
Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2013 5:41 AM
To: Nick Schmansky
Cc: Sarah Whittle; freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal analysis of one timepoint
Hi Sara,
yes, should work, just make sure that all cross are 5.1
Sarah,
I'm cc'ing martin reuter on this, but yes, you should be able to use
your cross-sectionally processed scans from v5.1 in a longitudinal
analysis using v5.2.
Nick
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 05:46 +, Sarah Whittle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> RE the below post, we have longitudinal data from three tim
Hi Sara,
yes, should work, just make sure that all cross are 5.1 (and not mixed)
to remain consistent.
By the way 5.1 can process differently many time points for each
subject. Just not subjects with a single time point only. To include
those you'd need 5.2
Best, Martin
On 03/06/2013 01:32
Hi,
RE the below post, we have longitudinal data from three time points, but a
number of participants have scans for only one or two time points. We've done
all of the cross-sectional analysis (including a lot of manual editing) and are
ready to run everything through the longitudinal stream. O
Hi Henk-Jan,
to avoid bias between subjects with single time points and others, we
run them through the same steps. This way it is possible to include them
into the statistical analysis. (For this an artificial base is created
with the head in an upright and straight position).
This feature will
Hi Freesurfer experts,
This week a read the article of Bernal-Rusiel et al. titled "Statistical
analysis of longitudinal neuroimage data with Linear Mixed Effects models". In
this article you described the submission of single time-point scans to the
longitudinal pipeline of Freesurfer. I'm ver
15 matches
Mail list logo
