Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
thanks :) On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Harms, Michael wrote: > > That means that the collection of their fMRI spanned the date of the > change in the recon algorithm, so some was reconned with the “r177” > algorithm, and some with the “r227” algorithm. > > cheers, > -MH > > -- > Michael Harms, Ph.D. > --- > Conte Center for the Neuroscience of Mental Disorders > Washington University School of Medicine > Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134 > 660 South Euclid Ave. Tel: 314-747-6173 <(314)%20747-6173> > St. Louis, MO 63110 Email: mha...@wustl.edu > > From: on behalf of Joelle > Zimmermann > Date: Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 1:50 PM > To: "Glasser, Matthew" > > Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" > Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions > > One more question about this - a few subjects have: r177 r227 for the fMRI > recon. Does this mean both were done? Which of the two was used for these > subjects for the S900 release? > > Thanks, > Joelle > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Glasser, Matthew > wrote: > >> Yes. >> >> Peace, >> >> Matt. >> >> From: Joelle Zimmermann >> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM >> >> To: Matt Glasser >> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >> >> Thanks Michael and Matt. >> >> Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make >> some difference. >> >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew >> wrote: >> >>> It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. >>> Diffusion isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed >>> with the same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). >>> >>> Peace, >>> >>> Matt. >>> >>> From: Joelle Zimmermann >>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM >>> To: Matt Glasser >>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >>> >>> Thanks for your reply Matt. >>> >>> By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? >>> >>> So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the >>> diffusion? >>> >>> Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version >>> change occurred? >>> >>> Joelle >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change >>>> that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were >>>> retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data >>>> had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a >>>> covariate of no interest for version number. >>>> >>>> Peace, >>>> >>>> Matt. >>>> >>>> From: on behalf of Joelle >>>> Zimmermann >>>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM >>>> To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >>>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >>>> >>>> Hi HCPers, >>>> >>>> I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 >>>> HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and >>>> releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data >>>> collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison >>>> across acquisitions. >>>> >>>> See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand >>>> correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if >>>> i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first >>>> release? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Joelle >>>> >>>> Subject Release Acquisition >>>> 14 S900 Q06 >>>> 100206 S900 Q11 >>>> 100307 Q1 Q01 >>>> 100408 Q3 Q03 >>>> 100610 S900 Q08 >>>> 101006 S500 Q06 >>>> 101107 S500 Q06 >>>> 101309 S500 Q06 >>>> 101410 S500 Q06 >>>> 101612 S900 Q11 >>>> 101915 Q3 Q04 >>
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
That means that the collection of their fMRI spanned the date of the change in the recon algorithm, so some was reconned with the “r177” algorithm, and some with the “r227” algorithm. cheers, -MH -- Michael Harms, Ph.D. --- Conte Center for the Neuroscience of Mental Disorders 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: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 1:50 PM To: "Glasser, Matthew" mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions One more question about this - a few subjects have: r177 r227 for the fMRI recon. Does this mean both were done? Which of the two was used for these subjects for the S900 release? Thanks, Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: Yes. Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks Michael and Matt. Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make some difference. On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks for your reply Matt. By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the diffusion? Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change occurred? Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
I think that means that one session was with one recon and the other with another recon. Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 1:50 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions One more question about this - a few subjects have: r177 r227 for the fMRI recon. Does this mean both were done? Which of the two was used for these subjects for the S900 release? Thanks, Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: Yes. Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks Michael and Matt. Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make some difference. On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks for your reply Matt. By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the diffusion? Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change occurred? Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
One more question about this - a few subjects have: r177 r227 for the fMRI recon. Does this mean both were done? Which of the two was used for these subjects for the S900 release? Thanks, Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Glasser, Matthew wrote: > Yes. > > Peace, > > Matt. > > From: Joelle Zimmermann > Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM > > To: Matt Glasser > Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" > Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions > > Thanks Michael and Matt. > > Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make > some difference. > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew > wrote: > >> It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion >> isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the >> same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). >> >> Peace, >> >> Matt. >> >> From: Joelle Zimmermann >> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM >> To: Matt Glasser >> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >> >> Thanks for your reply Matt. >> >> By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? >> >> So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the >> diffusion? >> >> Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version >> change occurred? >> >> Joelle >> >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew >> wrote: >> >>> The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change >>> that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were >>> retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data >>> had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a >>> covariate of no interest for version number. >>> >>> Peace, >>> >>> Matt. >>> >>> From: on behalf of Joelle >>> Zimmermann >>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM >>> To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >>> >>> Hi HCPers, >>> >>> I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 >>> HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and >>> releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data >>> collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison >>> across acquisitions. >>> >>> See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand >>> correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if >>> i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first >>> release? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Joelle >>> >>> Subject Release Acquisition >>> 14 S900 Q06 >>> 100206 S900 Q11 >>> 100307 Q1 Q01 >>> 100408 Q3 Q03 >>> 100610 S900 Q08 >>> 101006 S500 Q06 >>> 101107 S500 Q06 >>> 101309 S500 Q06 >>> 101410 S500 Q06 >>> 101612 S900 Q11 >>> 101915 Q3 Q04 >>> >>> ___ >>> HCP-Users mailing list >>> HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org >>> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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. >> > > > -- > > 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
Yes. Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks Michael and Matt. Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make some difference. On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks for your reply Matt. By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the diffusion? Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change occurred? Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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. 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
Thanks Michael and Matt. Were they all collected at the same site? If not, I'd expect this to make some difference. On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Glasser, Matthew wrote: > It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion > isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the > same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). > > Peace, > > Matt. > > From: Joelle Zimmermann > Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM > To: Matt Glasser > Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" > Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions > > Thanks for your reply Matt. > > By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? > > So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the > diffusion? > > Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change > occurred? > > Joelle > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew > wrote: > >> The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change >> that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were >> retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data >> had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a >> covariate of no interest for version number. >> >> Peace, >> >> Matt. >> >> From: on behalf of Joelle >> Zimmermann >> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM >> To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" >> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions >> >> Hi HCPers, >> >> I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. >> I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases >> would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at >> different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across >> acquisitions. >> >> See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand >> correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if >> i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first >> release? >> >> Thanks, >> Joelle >> >> Subject Release Acquisition >> 14 S900 Q06 >> 100206 S900 Q11 >> 100307 Q1 Q01 >> 100408 Q3 Q03 >> 100610 S900 Q08 >> 101006 S500 Q06 >> 101107 S500 Q06 >> 101309 S500 Q06 >> 101410 S500 Q06 >> 101612 S900 Q11 >> 101915 Q3 Q04 >> >> ___ >> HCP-Users mailing list >> HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org >> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users >> >> >> -- >> >> 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
It is a variable in the .csv you download out of the database. Diffusion isn’t affected by this, just fMRI because diffusion was processed with the same recon version (old scans were reprocessed). Peace, Matt. From: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:58 PM To: Matt Glasser mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Thanks for your reply Matt. By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the diffusion? Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change occurred? Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
The name of the variable that Matt is referring to is “fMRI_3T_ReconVrs”. Once you control for that, the main use of the “Acquisition” variable would be to see if there are any drifts in the results over time. If you find any, please let us know! cheers, -MH -- Michael Harms, Ph.D. --- Conte Center for the Neuroscience of Mental Disorders 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: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of "Glasser, Matthew" mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:51 PM To: Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>>, "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
Thanks for your reply Matt. By version number, do you mean the "acquisition" - that is, the Q#? So you expect the fMRI to be more different across acquisitions than the diffusion? Do you recall at which acquisition the image reconstruction version change occurred? Joelle On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Glasser, Matthew wrote: > The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change > that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were > retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data > had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a > covariate of no interest for version number. > > Peace, > > Matt. > > From: on behalf of Joelle > Zimmermann > Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM > To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" > Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions > > Hi HCPers, > > I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. > I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases > would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at > different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across > acquisitions. > > See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand > correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if > i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first > release? > > Thanks, > Joelle > > Subject Release Acquisition > 14 S900 Q06 > 100206 S900 Q11 > 100307 Q1 Q01 > 100408 Q3 Q03 > 100610 S900 Q08 > 101006 S500 Q06 > 101107 S500 Q06 > 101309 S500 Q06 > 101410 S500 Q06 > 101612 S900 Q11 > 101915 Q3 Q04 > > ___ > HCP-Users mailing list > HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org > http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users > > > -- > > 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
Re: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
The main thing to consider was a an image reconstruction version change that occurred relatively early in the project. Diffusion data were retroreconned (and so all data have the same version), but fMRI raw data had not been saved and could not be retroreconned. We advise using a covariate of no interest for version number. Peace, Matt. From: mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Joelle Zimmermann mailto:joelle.t.zimmerm...@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900Q06 100206 S900Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900Q08 101006 S500Q06 101107 S500Q06 101309 S500Q06 101410 S500Q06 101612 S900Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users 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
[HCP-Users] comparison across acquisitions
Hi HCPers, I'm working with structural and functional connectomes from the S900 HCP. I'm wondering how the different acquisitions (ie Q1 Q2 etc) and releases would affect comparison across all SCs for example. Was data collected at different sites for example? - which may affect comparison across acquisitions. See below info pasted from behaviour spreadsheet. Do I understand correctly the "Release" column is when subjects were first released. but if i am getting all data from the S900, then I shouldn't care about this first release? Thanks, Joelle Subject Release Acquisition 14 S900 Q06 100206 S900 Q11 100307 Q1 Q01 100408 Q3 Q03 100610 S900 Q08 101006 S500 Q06 101107 S500 Q06 101309 S500 Q06 101410 S500 Q06 101612 S900 Q11 101915 Q3 Q04 ___ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
