Hi Bruce,
I am sorry for asking you question as this, but I really don't know how to do it? It seems that GLM is suitable for there are two groups or more. But I only have one group, If I want to get the line trend with eTIV corrected for the relationship between age and volume, what should I do? The picture is my result, but it doesn't corrected by eTIV. I appreciate your help, please. Thanks a lot! 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 colo >> 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 this >> >> >> 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 chang >> 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 no d >> iff >> >> ere >> >> >> nce >> >> >> >> in >> >> >> >> >> right hippocampus. In the second way, there was both no >> >> >> >> >> statistical difference in left 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 differ >> 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 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.