(just a correction: flip angle 9°, not 90 for MPRAGE) On 13 July 2017 at 12:19, Lisa Kramarenko <lisa.kramare...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Matt, > > I completed all three structural pipelines and performed PALM comparison > for myelin maps. However, the result I got was somewhat opposed to > expectations (patients with early MS having significantly stronger > myelination compared to healthy controls). > I wondered that maybe something in our acquisition technique could have > caused an error in the calculation (as they are a bit different from the > HCP protocol)? I used the following images: > > 3D MPRAGE (TR = 1900 ms, TE = 2.55 ms, TI = 900 ms, flip angle = 90 , FOV > = 240 x 240 mm2 , matrix size = 240 x 240, 176 slices, slice thickness = 1 > mm), no fat suppression > T2 SPACE (same matrix, FOV, and number of slices as in the T1w, TR=5000ms, > TE= 393ms, flip angle = 120, slice thickness = 1mm), no fat suppression > > Is there anything that would have cause imprecise calculation of myelin > maps or is it just how our results are? > > Thanks a lot!! > > Lisa > _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
