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 <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> > >> >> >> 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" > >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> 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" > >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> 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" > >> >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list [email protected] 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.
