you could create a mask that is the AND of all your subject masks I suppose
On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Dorian P. wrote:
Thanks. I created a video to loop through all my 170+ subjects in template
space:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxHeqEv37qqDeGFWVnpSVkVobkk
I see some cases that have dramatic
Thanks. I created a video to loop through all my 170+ subjects in template
space:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxHeqEv37qqDeGFWVnpSVkVobkk
I see some cases that have dramatic problems. I will need to check those
more carefully and probably do an inspection of each one in individual
space. Be
Hi Dorian
you can load the aparc.annot for each subject and use it to chek if the
spherical registration worked ok. It's easy enough to write a script to
load these for each subject, then write a tif file with a medial view, and
zip through them all with nmovie
cheers
Bruce
On Thu, 9 Mar 2017,
Thank you Bruce, Douglas.
Yes, I think thicknesses were obtained with v 5.3.0. There might be errors
as Bruce pointed out, I am going now through all maps to check them. This
makes me think of a question. Volumetric template registrations sometimes
go wrong. Does this happen also to surface regist
On 03/08/2017 09:27 PM, Dorian P. wrote:
> Hi Freesurfers,
>
> I am using R to perform thickness analyses. All subjects are
> transformed in fsaverage space and all values are placed in a matrix
> with 327684 columns (163842 for each hemisphere). I put the results
> back in a surface file (.as
Hi Dorian
that is a bit worriesome. Typically the surfaces are "frozen" at the
midline and hence the thickness is 0, so there should be no difference. I
guess if a single subject had an incorrect CC segmentation you would be 0
variance within one group and hence significant results or something
