I suppose you could look for voxels that outside of the cortex and
adjacent to it
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, John Anderson wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
Dear Dr Bruce,
Thank you for the response. Indeed, I was completely wrong, these represent a
pathology and should
not correct for!
Kindly, I have one additional question not relevant to the subject of this
email. Is there any way
in Freesurfer to create mask for the regions between the sulcuses. I want to
compute PET signal in
these regions and normalize for it.
Thank you so much!
why do you want to correct for them? They likely represent a pathological
process, so correcting for
them may remove whatever effects you are looking for, no? The space between the
sulci and the
ventricle volume won't directly affect surface-based analysis, but of course
the sulcal widening
likely reflects cortical atrophy that will be
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On July 11, 2018 11:37 AM, John Anderson <john.ande...@protonmail.com> wrote:
Dear Freesurfer experts,
I have two groups of subjects (healthy and patients). The patients have
different degrees of
atrophy. Looking into the individual scans, the subjects are largely different
in the space
between the sulcuses and the size of ventricles. My questions are:
1. Is there any way to correct for these differences in the surface based
2. Including eTIV covariate does it help in this case?
3. Does the resampling to "fsaverage" overcome the challenge of these
differences between the
I appreciate any advice,
Freesurfer mailing list
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.