Hi - yes, that's a good typical use of Featquery - although if FEAT
already reported a group difference within that mask there's not
necessarily any reason to re-run the test using the Featquery on those
summary zstats.
Note though that FEAT will be running any comparisons on the COPEs not
zstats so it's not quite the same.....
Cheers.
On 15 Jul 2009, at 03:19, SUBSCRIBE FSL Yoona Kang wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I performed an ROI analysis using Featquery option, and wanted to
> make sure
> I did it right.
>
> I first created a mask using a cluster from a functional image, then
> looked
> at the activity within that mask by running featquery for each 16
> individuals across 2 conditions (so 32 featquery runs in total). I
> collected
> zstat scores within those masked voxels for each subject, then ran a
> paired-sample t-test, comparing activities in the two conditions. The
> results showed that there was a significantly different activation
> between
> two conditions within the specified region.
> Was that a correct way to do an ROI analysis? I'd very much
> appreciate your
> help.
> Thanks!
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Associate Director, Oxford University FMRIB Centre
FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 222726 (fax 222717)
[log in to unmask] http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|