 |
 |
Dear Christian, Thank you for your response. The VBM toolbox corrects the displayed p-values like the NS toolbox does, but it can not threshold for cluster level. That is, the clusters are present even under significance 0.05. To remove them I added some code to the spm_getSPM. All clusters not reaching significance are not present in the results any more (and the other clusters stay exactly the same). Hope I am not doing anything wrong by double thresholding voxels and remaining clusters. Dorian. 2009/5/26 Christian Gaser <[log in to unmask]>: > Hi Dorian, > > the first hack is implemented in the VBM5.1 toolbox. Use the option "Results with non- > stationary correction" and optionally skip the non-stationary option (which was thought > for use of VBM data): > http://dbm.neuro.uni-jena.de/vbm/download/ > > Best regards, > > Christian > > -- > ____________________________________________________________________________ > > Christian Gaser, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor of Computational Neuroscience > Department of Psychiatry > Friedrich-Schiller-University of Jena > Jahnstrasse 3, D-07743 Jena, Germany > Tel: ++49-3641-934752 Fax: ++49-3641-934755 > e-mail: [log in to unmask] > http://dbm.neuro.uni-jena.de > > > On Mon, 25 May 2009 12:49:05 +0200, Dorian P. <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>Hi SPM list, >> >>I need some help on two SPM hacks. >> >>1. >>Does anybody have a hack to threshold both at voxel level (normal SPM) >>and at cluster level at the same time? (I.e. voxel threshold 0.0005 + >>cluster threshold 0.05) >> >>2. >>And does anybody have a hack to use a ROI as mask? At present SPM can >>mask only with another contrast. There was a modified version of >>spm_getSPM by Jan Glascher, but when I looked inside I saw major >>differences from the actual function of SPM5. >>https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0812&L=SPM&P=R43519 >> >> >>Thank you for any help. >>Dorian > > >