MSMAll is supposed to have higher distortions than MSMSulc.  This is by design 
as we are very conservative about distortions with MSMSulc to avoid overfitting 
to folds (a rampant problem in both folding-based surface registration and 
volume-based registration).  Whether MSMAll was working is not determined 
solely by the distortions, but rather their magnitude with respect to known 
good data, the quality of the alignment itself, and the test-retest 
reproducibility of the alignment.

Matt.

From: Maria Sison <maria.si...@duke.edu>
Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 3:15 PM
To: "Glasser, Matthew" <glass...@wustl.edu>, "Harms, Michael" 
<mha...@wustl.edu>, Steve Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: HCP 讨论组 <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>
Subject: RE: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

Thank you for all of the insightful comments, this has been a huge help. I 
think we’ll stick with MSMSulc measures until we have a clearer idea of what 
data we’d need to confidently run MSMAll. I compared strain maps for MSMSulc 
and MSMAll and in general the values are more extreme for MSMAll. I also made 
maps of areal distortion (-surface-distortion) between test and retest MSMAll 
midthickness and these were more extreme across the whole cortex when compared 
to MSMSulc test retest distortion maps, so this seems to line up with what 
Michael was saying about our MSMAll registrations.

Best,
Maria

________________________________
From: Glasser, Matthew <glass...@wustl.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 9:22:51 PM
To: Harms, Michael; Maria Sison; Steve Smith
Cc: HCP 讨论组
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

This issue of what kind of data and how much is something we plan to 
investigate in detail for MSMAll (and the cortical areal classifier).

Matt.

From: "Harms, Michael" <mha...@wustl.edu>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 4:41 PM
To: "Glasser, Matthew" <glass...@wustl.edu>, Maria Sison 
<maria.si...@duke.edu>, Steve Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: HCP 讨论组 <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data


While I’m not surprised that the ICCs would be lower for an anatomical-based 
measure for MSMAll than MSMSulc, I am surprised by the magnitude of the change 
(from 0.9 to 0.65), especially for a parcellated analysis, since only changes 
in the precise border of the parcellations should be affecting the results.

Your results imply that the test and retest MSMAll registrations are very 
different from each other.

Wouldn’t the Strain maps for MSMSulc vs MSMAll be informative here?  You might 
also want to examine some sort of measure of the distortion between the two 
MSMAll registrations directly.

Cheers,
-MH

--
Michael Harms, Ph.D.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Associate Professor of Psychiatry
Washington University School of Medicine
Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134
660 South Euclid Ave.                        Tel: 314-747-6173
St. Louis, MO  63110                          Email: mha...@wustl.edu

From: <hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org> on behalf of "Glasser, Matthew" 
<glass...@wustl.edu>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 4:23 PM
To: Maria Sison <maria.si...@duke.edu>, Stephen Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: HCP 讨论组 <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

Not running sICA+FIX might well be a part of the problem.  The TR is quite long 
as Steve says, which will limit the accuracy of sICA+FIX cleanup some also.  
Also, surface area and thickness might prefer MSMSulc due to correlations with 
folding patterns.  Myelin, task, and resting state fMRI will more tend to 
correlate with MSMAll.

Matt.

From: <hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org> on behalf of Maria Sison 
<maria.si...@duke.edu>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 3:40 PM
To: Steve Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: HCP 讨论组 <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

Thank you so much, this is very helpful and interesting to think about. We 
concatenated rest and tasks and regressed out tasks to get around 1000 TRs of 
pseudo-rest which we then used for MSMAll. Still not nearly as much as HCP, but 
I would be interested to hear what a ballpark minimum data requirement for 
MSMALL would be.

Best,
Maria

________________________________
From: Steve Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 4:19:24 PM
To: Maria Sison
Cc: HCP 讨论组
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

Hi - probably the single primary thing is number of timepoints - though things 
like TR and spatial resolution will also affect this.

My guess is still that probably you don't have enough timepoints here to get 
decent single-subject RSN maps (decen enough for MSMALL that is).  Emma or Matt 
might have more direct insight into the minimum amount of data you need to get 
MSMALL working well.   Unless you can combine more of your datasets together 
(even if just for the purposes of MSM) then you might be better off with 
MSMSULC.

Cheers.

ps with this setup I would definitely push multiband at least as high as 6 if 
not 8.










On 9 May 2019, at 15:12, Maria Sison 
<maria.si...@duke.edu<mailto:maria.si...@duke.edu>> wrote:

Hello,

Here’s our rfMRI protocol: each participant was scanned using a Siemens Skyra 
3T scanner equipped with a 64-channel head/neck coil. A series of 72 
interleaved axial T2-weighted functional slices were acquired using a 3-fold 
multi-band accelerated echo planar imaging sequence with the following 
parameters: TR = 2000 ms, TE = 27 msec, flip angle = 90°, field-of-view = 200 
mm, voxel size = 2 mm isotropic, slice thickness = 2 mm without gap. Total scan 
length is 496 s.

Out of curiosity, which parameters would be most important for MSMAll?

Thank you,
Maria

________________________________
From: Steve Smith <st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk<mailto:st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>>
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 3:56:49 PM
To: Maria Sison
Cc: HCP 讨论组
Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MSMAll vs. MSMSulc reliability in our data

Hi - what is your rfMRI protocol?   It might be that you're right that the 
difference is in the preprop - but my first guess might be that - if the rfMRI 
data is not as high quality as HCP rfMRI data - it might not be good enough to 
reliably drive MSMALL?

Cheers.







On 9 May 2019, at 14:45, Maria Sison 
<maria.si...@duke.edu<mailto:maria.si...@duke.edu>> wrote:

Dear experts,

We have run the HCP minimal preprocessing pipelines on our data (1 mm isotropic 
T1w and FLAIR + rest and 4 tasks) and compared test-retest reliability for 
MSMSulc and MSMAll in 20 subjects. Specifically, we looked at intraclass 
correlations for parcellated cortical thickness and surface area and found that 
they were much lower for MSMAll compared to MSMSulc in our test-retest sample 
(MSMSulc on average above 0.9 and for MSMAll around 0.65 on average). When we 
looked in HCP retest data, the ICCs for MSMAll were more similar to those for 
MSMSulc (both above 0.9), but still slightly lower.

There are a few major differences in how we ran the pipeline. We skipped 
sICA+FIX and ran our own preprocessing on task and rest fMRI after fMRIVolume 
but before fMRISulc (bandpass filtering, motion correction, censoring, 
CompCorr, and regressed out tasks). We thought our processing would be ok for 
cleaning task fMRI, but I see that sICA+FIX is highly recommended before 
running MSMAll 
(https://www.mail-archive.com/hcp-users@humanconnectome.org/msg06876.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_hcp-2Dusers-40humanconnectome.org_msg06876.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=L2sucJXfwykaL3uBceFg9ItkjPLvmDK9C4reZWm3I3w&s=owCDH48LPtiA_trirzvrgF5FPS8Ba-Yz0KyPbwHJ6Mc&e=>),
 so I’m planning to try to rerun with sICA+FIX. Do you think that MSMAll is so 
dependent on sICA+FIX that it could be causing these problems in our data or do 
you have any other ideas about why we're getting such a large drop in ICCs for 
MSMAll? In other words, what are the minimal preprocessing requirements to 
effectively use MSMAll in non-HCP data? Any comments would be appreciated!

Thank you,
Maria
_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org>
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.humanconnectome.org_mailman_listinfo_hcp-2Dusers&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=L2sucJXfwykaL3uBceFg9ItkjPLvmDK9C4reZWm3I3w&s=5J6HdZ4Fo_r3ENfbGzf9A5NOjDXu5D5DCwt8ZS8HkVg&e=>


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Head of Analysis,  WIN (FMRIB) Oxford

FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford  OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 610470
st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk<mailto:st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>    
http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk_-7Esteve&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=L2sucJXfwykaL3uBceFg9ItkjPLvmDK9C4reZWm3I3w&s=flsdWLpWURamBFUowb_0CPPOb_320ohP4cEZWX9OfmQ&e=>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stop the cultural destruction of 
Tibet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__smithinks.net&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=L2sucJXfwykaL3uBceFg9ItkjPLvmDK9C4reZWm3I3w&s=YgiVdNVcsd8Q5XdU8ruCngYSzvnnxWMf0PaRuPdVRRI&e=>


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Head of Analysis,  WIN (FMRIB) Oxford

FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford  OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 610470
st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk<mailto:st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk>    
http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk_-7Esteve&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=Um-g-12CMk5HZD2CpGPIwsIjPs-quCZ4nII9-pkJ0QQ&s=N3eSUhJbLj8I-zAqkRZr3NTpkhsenLBPF-9TWq7L-tc&e=>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stop the cultural destruction of 
Tibet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__smithinks.net&d=DwMFaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=Um-g-12CMk5HZD2CpGPIwsIjPs-quCZ4nII9-pkJ0QQ&s=OGvyl_gxKmsk4JjyQXTnBrWPX7Qm6bqgYHZ6BRA2IpY&e=>












_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.humanconnectome.org_mailman_listinfo_hcp-2Dusers&d=DwQGaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=deTsizx7WkkFN2X__K4j6DbgWlDJPTLzw1sdV5h8cIM&s=uCu2TQGkYvp4r204RxnvTTRzL-_kwRlqJcfQf9mI_hM&e=>

________________________________
The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare 
Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the 
intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying 
or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please 
immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.

_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.humanconnectome.org_mailman_listinfo_hcp-2Dusers&d=DwQGaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=jYoYbUrDg7XpYyosGa9JK-bzhv9_497jTGvkuIGUvC4&m=deTsizx7WkkFN2X__K4j6DbgWlDJPTLzw1sdV5h8cIM&s=uCu2TQGkYvp4r204RxnvTTRzL-_kwRlqJcfQf9mI_hM&e=>

________________________________
The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare 
Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the 
intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying 
or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please 
immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.

________________________________
The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare 
Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the 
intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying 
or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please 
immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.

_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users

Reply via email to