help
help > RE: White Matter Connectivity Results
Dec 20, 2016 10:12 AM | Pravesh Parekh - University of Oslo
RE: White Matter Connectivity Results
Hello Emmaly,
Well...this is indeed strange...one way to start the debugging process would be to check if the segmentation/normalization module ran properly. Try checking if the structural and functional data are properly registered to each other. Also check if there are large movement artifacts or anything of the sort which might potentially lead to white matter involvement. What about smoothing...?
I do agree that it seems strange that you have WM areas coming in because they are being explicitly regressed out during the denoising step...the above suggestions are only speculative...
Best
Pravesh
Originally posted by Emmaly Owens:
Well...this is indeed strange...one way to start the debugging process would be to check if the segmentation/normalization module ran properly. Try checking if the structural and functional data are properly registered to each other. Also check if there are large movement artifacts or anything of the sort which might potentially lead to white matter involvement. What about smoothing...?
I do agree that it seems strange that you have WM areas coming in because they are being explicitly regressed out during the denoising step...the above suggestions are only speculative...
Best
Pravesh
Originally posted by Emmaly Owens:
Hi Pravesh,
Thank you very much for your response. The areas we are particularly concerned about are the bilateral "arches" that appear in our negative result. They seem to be almost identically positioned, with very similar coordinates on both sides, and it doesn't appear that the significant voxels are inferior enough to be sub-cortical structures. I'm not sure if this means we did something incorrectly in the setup steps, or if this is indicative of a certain selection we failed to make during the analysis steps, but the results seem strange given that we regressed out white matter.
Best,
Emmaly
Thank you very much for your response. The areas we are particularly concerned about are the bilateral "arches" that appear in our negative result. They seem to be almost identically positioned, with very similar coordinates on both sides, and it doesn't appear that the significant voxels are inferior enough to be sub-cortical structures. I'm not sure if this means we did something incorrectly in the setup steps, or if this is indicative of a certain selection we failed to make during the analysis steps, but the results seem strange given that we regressed out white matter.
Best,
Emmaly
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 14, 2016 | |
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 19, 2016 | |
| Pravesh Parekh | Dec 19, 2016 | |
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 20, 2016 | |
| Jeff Browndyke | Dec 20, 2016 | |
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 21, 2016 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Dec 20, 2016 | |
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 21, 2016 | |
| Pravesh Parekh | Dec 20, 2016 | |
| Pravesh Parekh | Dec 20, 2016 | |
| Emmaly Owens | Dec 15, 2016 | |
