JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for FSL Archives


FSL Archives

FSL Archives


FSL@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

FSL Home

FSL Home

FSL  February 2012

FSL February 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

AW: [FSL] Re : [FSL] Sanity Check: Longitudinal TBSS analyses

From:

"Witte, Veronica" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

FSL - FMRIB's Software Library <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 21 Feb 2012 17:21:55 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (66 lines)

Dear experts,
considering the longitudinal design of two groups, would it also make sense to set up the randomise-design in an "ANCOVA-fashion", i.e.  to feed the 4D data from timepoint 2 into randomise, model the interaction effect between time + group by a two-sample t-test, and to add the 4D data from timepoint 1 as a voxelwise regressor (covariate)? As far as I understand, looking at longitudinal designs using repeated measures approaches (~paired t-tests) or using ANCOVA approaches may result in slightly different statistics. But actually I am not sure whether randomise can handle voxelwise regressors..
Many thanks for your advice! 
best, Veronica    

________________________________________
Von: FSL - FMRIB's Software Library [[log in to unmask]] im Auftrag von Gwenaëlle DOUAUD [[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2012 13:53
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: [FSL] Re : [FSL] Sanity Check: Longitudinal TBSS analyses

Hey Kirstie,

just to add to what Steve said earlier, you might want to deproject (in the MNI space) your results for all the subjects, so that you can be confident that you are comparing the same tracts, especially within subject... Also, you can just run directly fslmaths -sub on your all_FA_skeletonised_T1 and all_FA_skeletonised_T2 (both obtained with the -T option for tbss_3_postreg) to get your substracted 4D image for randomise.

Cheers,
Gwenaëlle

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gwenaëlle Douaud, PhD
FMRIB Centre, University of Oxford
John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington
OX3 9DU Oxford UK
Tel: +44 (0) 1865 222 523
Fax: +44 (0) 1865 222 717
www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~douaud
--------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________
De : Kirstie Whitaker <[log in to unmask]>
À : [log in to unmask]
Envoyé le : Mercredi 15 février 2012 23h24
Objet : [FSL] Sanity Check: Longitudinal TBSS analyses

Hi FSL gurus,

I'm running an analysis looking at the relationship between changes in white matter (time 1 to time 2) for two different groups.

In response to this email<https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=fsl;d27f897d.1111> from November 2011, Tom Nichols advises:

--
Sorry to confuse things, but as Donald just pointed out to me off-list, you have a 2x2 mixed design and so what I say below (regarding a paired t-test) is irrelevant.  Donald is correct, since you have one *between* subject factor (in addition to a within subject factor) randomise cannot fit this data with this model.

The only way to analyze this presently is fit three separate models, as Donald and others frequently prescribe:  Average the pairs, and fit a two-sample t-test to get main effect of group; difference the pairs, and fit a one-sample t-test to get the main effect of baseline/follow up; and fit the difference data with a two-sample t-test to get the interaction.
--

I've run all participants through the tbss processing steps and, to create the appropriate difference images, I've subtracted the *skeletonised* data for T1 from T2.  My question is whether this is the best way to subtract these two images.  I tried subtracting the two images before they were skeletonised (but in MNI space) and was then unsure of how to skeletonise these maps.  I also figured that subtracting the skeletonised data meant that I'm testing the same values that would be put into a unpaired ttest.

Any thoughts on the best way to subtract (or average) T1 and T2 data would be really helpful.  If it's relevant, I'm also planning to use these difference maps to relate changes in white matter to changes in behavior.

Thank you!
Kx

--
It's that time again!  I'm riding from San Francisco to LA with AIDS/Lifecycle for the fourth time in June 2012.
Please donate anything you can to help me reach my goal: http://www.tofighthiv.org/goto/kirstie
-----------------------
Kirstie Whitaker
Doctoral Candidate
Cognitive Control and Development Laboratory
Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute
University of California at Berkeley
134 Barker Hall, MC 3190
Berkeley, CA, 94707
tel: 510 684 2456
web: bungelab.berkeley.edu<http://bungelab.berkeley.edu/>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager