The easiest thing is #2. It will produce rstd.mgh as an output, and
that's what you want.
Burmicz, Ryszarda wrote:
Hi Freesurfers,
I have tried looking this up on the list, but I don't understand
exactly what to do in this scenario: I have a group of subjects (all
controls). I want to crea
Hi Freesurfers,
I have tried looking this up on the list, but I don't understand exactly what
to do in this scenario: I have a group of subjects (all controls). I want to
create a surface map of the standard deviations of the thickness values (i.e.
to show how the thicknesses vary across subje
not really, since they contain both gyral and sulcal regions. Better than
the whole surface I guess, but spatial standard deviations don't mean a
whole lot - it's the cross subject ones you care about
Bruce
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006,
Sasha Wolosin wrote:
I understand that thickness may vary great
Hi Sasha,
the standard deviation across the surface isn't a very meaningful number,
since the thickness isn't spatially stationary.
cheers,
Bruce
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Sasha
Wolosin wrote:
Dear all,
I am interested in measuring mean thickness within ROI in MPRAGEs of
children. My mean t
I understand that thickness may vary greatly across the entire surface,
but shouldn't we expect some stability within smaller regions (e.g.
those in the Desikan/Killany atlas)?
>>> Bruce Fischl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/24/2006 4:40 pm >>>
Hi Sasha,
the standard deviation across the surface isn't a v
Dear all,
I am interested in measuring mean thickness within ROI in MPRAGEs of
children. My mean thickness values tend to be around 3.3 mm, with a
standard deviation of about 1mm. I am concerned that these standard
deviations are somewhat high. What typical values should I be expecting
for st
