Dear Dr. Poline: I would be very appreciate if I would be able to receive
a reprint of your article:
Poline JB, Worsley KJ, Evans AC, Friston KJ. Combining spatial extent and
peak intensity to test for activations in functional imaging.Neuroimage.
1997 Feb;5(2):83-96. PMID: 9345540; UI: 98005407
If you were able to send it as an e-mail attachment (.pdf file?) that
would be best for me.
If not, my address is:
Jeffrey Lorberbaum, MD
Anxiety Disorders and Functional Neuroimaging Fellow
Medical University of South Carolina
Charleston, SC 29425
USA
fax (843) 577-4577
Thank you very much
Sincerely,
Jeff Lorberbaum
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000,
Jeffrey P Lorberbaum wrote:
>
>
> Dear group:
>
> In performing a cluster-level analysis, I have read that the minimum
> appropriate z-score(uncorrected) is 2.00. With a z score of 2, what would
> be the minimum potential spatial extent probability value that might still
> keep the false positive rate relatively low? I thought I read in the spm
> notes that the lowest spatial extent probability value that still gave a
> reasonably small rate of false positives was 0.15. Is this accurate or too
> lenient?
>
> Thank you very much for any help.
>
> Jeff Lorberbaum
> Medical University of South Carolina
>
> PS- If it helps, I am performing an fMRI experiment in which I have 40
> active minus rest condition comparisons, voxel size of 4 x 4 x4 mm,and a
> smoothing kernal of 8 x 8 x8.
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|