help
help > RE: slice timing correction
May 24, 2018 10:05 AM | Alfonso Nieto-Castanon - Boston University
RE: slice timing correction
Dear Lee,
Two quick additional comments about this case:
1) my guess is that perhaps you are seeing 91 slices (instead of your expected 72 slices) because you may have normalized your data prior to slice-timing-correction (normalization will resample your data by default to a canonical voxel-size and bounding-box). This is not the recommended approach, and slice-timing correction is typically recommended either as the first step of preprocessing or as the second step (right after realignment). See for example the default preprocessing pipeline in CONN for reference. If you are already using the default preprocessing pipeline, this probably means that you are trying to re-apply the preprocessing pipeline to an already-preprocessed dataset (already in MNI-space), so simply go back to your original data in the CONN gui 'functional' and 'structural' tabs before re-starting your preprocessing pipeline and that should fix this issue
2) when using multiband sequences (e.g. MB=3 in your case) you need to specify slice-times instead of slice-order for slice-timing-correction (i.e. enter a vector with 72 numbers specifying the acquisition time in milliseconds for each slice). For example, in your case this may look something like the following sequence: 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 NOTE: this is just an example, it assumes ascending order of slices with MB=3, but check with your physicist to figure out the actual order of your multiband sequence (e.g. it may be interleaved ascending instead of simply ascending). I believe from your description that you are already doing this correctly but I just wanted to double-check
Hope this helps
Alfonso
Originally posted by jeonho lee:
Two quick additional comments about this case:
1) my guess is that perhaps you are seeing 91 slices (instead of your expected 72 slices) because you may have normalized your data prior to slice-timing-correction (normalization will resample your data by default to a canonical voxel-size and bounding-box). This is not the recommended approach, and slice-timing correction is typically recommended either as the first step of preprocessing or as the second step (right after realignment). See for example the default preprocessing pipeline in CONN for reference. If you are already using the default preprocessing pipeline, this probably means that you are trying to re-apply the preprocessing pipeline to an already-preprocessed dataset (already in MNI-space), so simply go back to your original data in the CONN gui 'functional' and 'structural' tabs before re-starting your preprocessing pipeline and that should fix this issue
2) when using multiband sequences (e.g. MB=3 in your case) you need to specify slice-times instead of slice-order for slice-timing-correction (i.e. enter a vector with 72 numbers specifying the acquisition time in milliseconds for each slice). For example, in your case this may look something like the following sequence: 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 0.0 83.3 166.7 250.0 333.3 416.7 500.0 583.3 666.7 750.0 833.3 916.7 1000.0 1083.3 1166.7 1250.0 1333.3 1416.7 1500.0 1583.3 1666.7 1750.0 1833.3 1916.7 NOTE: this is just an example, it assumes ascending order of slices with MB=3, but check with your physicist to figure out the actual order of your multiband sequence (e.g. it may be interleaved ascending instead of simply ascending). I believe from your description that you are already doing this correctly but I just wanted to double-check
Hope this helps
Alfonso
Originally posted by jeonho lee:
Dear CONN-experts
I want to analyze the resting-state fMRI data obtained by using 3T Siemens Skyra scanner.
The parameters are the following: isovoxel of 2 mm3, TR=2 sec, multiband factor of 3.
After searching for the answer from the online webpages, some researchers recommend that slice timing correction is necessary in cases of TR=2 sec.
During slice time correction, I chose Manually define, and entered acquisition time of each slice(72 slice) obtained through the dcm2niix program.
However, in the preprocessing process, an error occurs repeatedly, and automatically returned as 1,2,3.......91.
Number of slices is... : 91
Time to Repeat (TR) is... : 2
Parameters are specified as... : slice indices
Completed : 11:46:44 - 22/12/2017
Done 'Slice Timing'
Running 'Slice Timing'
I can not understand what 91 means and why this phenomenon appears.
Any suggestion?
My question is very similar to what Larry did in 2017. I could not find the answer to that question and I was asked again.
Thanks for considering my request.
jh lee
I want to analyze the resting-state fMRI data obtained by using 3T Siemens Skyra scanner.
The parameters are the following: isovoxel of 2 mm3, TR=2 sec, multiband factor of 3.
After searching for the answer from the online webpages, some researchers recommend that slice timing correction is necessary in cases of TR=2 sec.
During slice time correction, I chose Manually define, and entered acquisition time of each slice(72 slice) obtained through the dcm2niix program.
However, in the preprocessing process, an error occurs repeatedly, and automatically returned as 1,2,3.......91.
Number of slices is... : 91
Time to Repeat (TR) is... : 2
Parameters are specified as... : slice indices
Completed : 11:46:44 - 22/12/2017
Done 'Slice Timing'
Running 'Slice Timing'
I can not understand what 91 means and why this phenomenon appears.
Any suggestion?
My question is very similar to what Larry did in 2017. I could not find the answer to that question and I was asked again.
Thanks for considering my request.
jh lee
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| jeonho lee | May 19, 2018 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | May 24, 2018 | |
| Larry Lai | May 19, 2018 | |
| jeonho lee | May 20, 2018 | |
| Larry Lai | May 20, 2018 | |
