help
help > RE: two times points rsfc
Apr 2, 2015 01:04 AM | Alfonso Nieto-Castanon - Boston University
RE: two times points rsfc
Hi Federico,
Yes, that sounds perfectly correct. There is no need to actually "concatenate" your functional data, you may simply enter 2 as the number of sessions per subjects (in Setup.Basic), then point to the 'Pre' scans for each subject's first-session data, and point to the 'Post" scans for each subjects' second-session data (in Setup.Functionals). Then you can define your two 'Pre' and 'Post' conditions (in Setup.Conditions) and indicate to CONN that the 'Pre' condition corresponds to the first-session and the 'Post' condition corresponds to the second-session (in Setup.Conditions simply click on the 'Pre' condition, then select all subjects, click on Session1, and enter 0 and inf in the onset and duration fields, respectively, and click on Session2 and leave the onset and duration fields empty there; then repeat for the 'Post' condition, select all subjects Session2, and enter 0 and inf in onset/duration, and select Session1 and leave onset/duration empty there).
When you get to the second-level results tab, if you simply want to look at the interaction between groups and treatment, select the two subject groups in the 'Subject effects' list and enter a [1 -1] contrast in the 'Between-subjects contrast', and then select the two conditions in the 'Conditions' list and enter a [1 -1] contrast in the 'Between-conditions contrast'.
Hope this helps and let me know if you would like me to further clarify any of this
Alfonso
Originally posted by Federico Nemmi:
Yes, that sounds perfectly correct. There is no need to actually "concatenate" your functional data, you may simply enter 2 as the number of sessions per subjects (in Setup.Basic), then point to the 'Pre' scans for each subject's first-session data, and point to the 'Post" scans for each subjects' second-session data (in Setup.Functionals). Then you can define your two 'Pre' and 'Post' conditions (in Setup.Conditions) and indicate to CONN that the 'Pre' condition corresponds to the first-session and the 'Post' condition corresponds to the second-session (in Setup.Conditions simply click on the 'Pre' condition, then select all subjects, click on Session1, and enter 0 and inf in the onset and duration fields, respectively, and click on Session2 and leave the onset and duration fields empty there; then repeat for the 'Post' condition, select all subjects Session2, and enter 0 and inf in onset/duration, and select Session1 and leave onset/duration empty there).
When you get to the second-level results tab, if you simply want to look at the interaction between groups and treatment, select the two subject groups in the 'Subject effects' list and enter a [1 -1] contrast in the 'Between-subjects contrast', and then select the two conditions in the 'Conditions' list and enter a [1 -1] contrast in the 'Between-conditions contrast'.
Hope this helps and let me know if you would like me to further clarify any of this
Alfonso
Originally posted by Federico Nemmi:
Hi everybody!
I have a mixed within-between design that I am dealing with.
I have two groups, each scanned twice, before and after a treatment.
What I want to do is compare the difference in resting state functional connectivity between pre and post treatment between the two groups.
To do so, I have planned to concatenate my two acquisitions for each subject and enter them as two different conditions (let's say pre and post) in first level analysis.
Then, I will use the within-between way of conducting analysis described in the FAQ to look at my effect of interest.
Do you think this is a good way to proceed ?
Is there a cleaner way of doing it ?
Thanks in advance for your answers and tips
Best
F.
I have a mixed within-between design that I am dealing with.
I have two groups, each scanned twice, before and after a treatment.
What I want to do is compare the difference in resting state functional connectivity between pre and post treatment between the two groups.
To do so, I have planned to concatenate my two acquisitions for each subject and enter them as two different conditions (let's say pre and post) in first level analysis.
Then, I will use the within-between way of conducting analysis described in the FAQ to look at my effect of interest.
Do you think this is a good way to proceed ?
Is there a cleaner way of doing it ?
Thanks in advance for your answers and tips
Best
F.
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Alain Imaging | Mar 30, 2015 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Apr 2, 2015 | |
| Bob Kraft | Dec 22, 2015 | |