 |
 |
Hi - AFAIK there has not been a problem in the past with these atlases wrt this L-R question. Steve. On 15 Apr 2013, at 10:24, "Muller, Sven (NIH/NIMH) [V]" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear FSLers, > > being new to DTI, I have just been wanting to read up on the different atlases being used for white matter and came across a recent paper in frontiers that suggests problems with the "ICBM-DTI-81 White-Matter Labels" atlas (Rohlfing Jan 2013 Front Neurosci http://www.frontiersin.org/Brain_Imaging_Methods/10.3389/fnins.2013.00004/full). > > I am now a little uncertain whether the concerns raised in the article do or do not concern the JHU ICBM-DTI-81 White-Matter Labels distributed with FSL because on the one hand, the article says the "JHU" from FSL (v.4.1.9) should be fine but the 2010 and 2012 versions of the ICBM have some problems, but on the other hand, given that the atlas in FSL is labelled "JHU ICBM..." I am not sure what to think. > > Does someone with more experience/knowledge on this issue know whether the precautions recommended in the recently published paper apply to the FSL atlas distributed with the latest couple of FSL versions (e.g., 5.0.1) or not as I want to make sure that I am correctly reporting my DTI findings? > > Many thanks in advance for your help!! > > best wishes, > > sven > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------