help
help > RE: QA - Functional Data Normalization
Jun 7, 2021 09:06 PM | Alfonso Nieto-Castanon - Boston University
RE: QA - Functional Data Normalization
Hi Rachel,
Yes, that looks reasonable, and the reference lines in those plots represent the expected position/area of gray matter voxels so you are exactly right that it is perfectly fine to see the eyeballs and CSF beyond those areas (you may see the example "QA report" file in http://www.conn-toolbox.org/conn-in-pict... for some reference QA plots)
Best
Alfonso
Originally posted by Rachel Corr:
Yes, that looks reasonable, and the reference lines in those plots represent the expected position/area of gray matter voxels so you are exactly right that it is perfectly fine to see the eyeballs and CSF beyond those areas (you may see the example "QA report" file in http://www.conn-toolbox.org/conn-in-pict... for some reference QA plots)
Best
Alfonso
Originally posted by Rachel Corr:
Originally posted by Rachel Corr:
Since it has been a few weeks, I wanted to bump this too see if anyone had any advice about this step in QA or not - I've been running analyses assuming this is ok, but am concerned my results might not be legitimate.
Hello,
Looking through my "QA normalization: functional data + outline of MNI TPM template" output, quite a few of my subjects appear to have issues with the top and bottom most slices, with the bottom slices missing activation within the outline or having dark spots outside the outline (which I'm assuming are from the eyeballs) and the top slices having a sort of "halo" around the data (which I'm assuming is an artifact from the skull). I'm attaching one subject as an example. If I am using the the default explicit voxel-level analysis mask in my setup > options, is this data outside the brain going to removed for analysis and not a major concern, or are there other steps I need to take to fix my data?
Thank you,
-Rachel
Looking through my "QA normalization: functional data + outline of MNI TPM template" output, quite a few of my subjects appear to have issues with the top and bottom most slices, with the bottom slices missing activation within the outline or having dark spots outside the outline (which I'm assuming are from the eyeballs) and the top slices having a sort of "halo" around the data (which I'm assuming is an artifact from the skull). I'm attaching one subject as an example. If I am using the the default explicit voxel-level analysis mask in my setup > options, is this data outside the brain going to removed for analysis and not a major concern, or are there other steps I need to take to fix my data?
Thank you,
-Rachel
Since it has been a few weeks, I wanted to bump this too see if anyone had any advice about this step in QA or not - I've been running analyses assuming this is ok, but am concerned my results might not be legitimate.
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Rachel Corr | May 19, 2021 | |
| Rachel Corr | Jun 7, 2021 | |
| Hugo Morandini | Jun 10, 2021 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Jun 7, 2021 | |