We wouldn’t recommend making comparisons across subjects in MNI space. It isn’t very accurate in the cerebral cortex (https://www.pnas.org/content/115/27/E6356.short). The
recommended data to use is in CIFTI space and has been functionally aligned across subjects and cleaned of spatially specific noise:
${StudyFolder}/${Subject}/MNINonLinear/Results/rfMRI_REST/rfMRI_REST_Atlas_MSMAll_hp0_clean.dtseries.nii.
Matt.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HCP-Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
hcp-users+...@humanconnectome.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/46ac3c45-5a94-4787-a9e3-8aea57d3ec4fn%40humanconnectome.org.
The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.
/subject#/ses-None/files/MNINonLinear/Results/task-rest01
brainmask_fs.2.0.nii.gz task-rest01_AtlasSubcortical_s2.nii.gz
DCANBOLDProc_v4.0.0 task-rest01_Jacobian.nii.gz
Movement_AbsoluteRMS_mean.txt task-rest01.L.atlasroi.32k_fs_LR.func.gii
Movement_AbsoluteRMS.txt task-rest01.L.native.func.gii
Movement_Regressors_dt.txt task-rest01.nii
Movement_Regressors.txt task-rest01.R.atlasroi.32k_fs_LR.func.gii
Movement_RelativeRMS_mean.txt task-rest01.R.native.func.gii
Movement_RelativeRMS.txt task-rest01_s2.atlasroi.L.32k_fs_LR.func.gii
RibbonVolumeToSurfaceMapping task-rest01_s2.atlasroi.R.32k_fs_LR.func.gii
task-rest01_Atlas.dtseries.nii task-rest01_SBRef.nii.gz
Thank you very much!
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "HCP-Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/topic/hcp-users/KhJlixM1EAQ/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to hcp-users+...@humanconnectome.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/F245204E-DFCE-45E0-9C3C-B6072BA73CBB%40wustl.edu.
I am confused. Are these your data or HCP Lifespan data? If they are your data, you still need to run MR+FIX and MSMAll (including DedriftAndResample) Pipelines before doing any subsequent task or resting state analysis to ensure the data are cleaned and functionally aligned across subjects.
We don’t typically do band pass filtering. This is a very blunt approach that treats signal and noise equivalently.
To make a parcellated connectome on a cleaned and functionally fMRI data, you first parcellate the data with wb_command -cifti-parcellate and then can compute the correlations with wb_command -cifti-correlation (it can also do covariance). You can do more advanced network modeling with FSLNets (e.g. partial correlation). To do group level analyses you can simply do things like a t-test across connectomes or linear regressions or that sort of thing. The PALM software can also help with advanced statistics.
Matt.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/SN6PR01MB4991127CC9F1AF1C36894F9581CC9%40SN6PR01MB4991.prod.exchangelabs.com.
Was the output even generated with the HCPPipelines? The fact that there is a a “DCANBOLDProc” directory suggests that it was probably generated from the DCAN fork of the HCPPipelines.
Cheers,
-MH
--
Michael Harms, Ph.D.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Associate Professor of Psychiatry
Washington University School of Medicine
Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134
660 South Euclid Ave. Tel: 314-747-6173
St. Louis, MO 63110 Email: mha...@wustl.edu
From: "Glasser, Matt" <glas...@wustl.edu>
Reply-To: "hcp-...@humanconnectome.org" <hcp-...@humanconnectome.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 at 7:26 PM
To: "hcp-...@humanconnectome.org" <hcp-...@humanconnectome.org>
Subject: Re: [hcp-users] Pulling HCP Derivatives into CONN Toolbox
* External Email - Caution * |
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/D8916E84-9F81-49AE-9A93-19074328CE18%40wustl.edu.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/71E0F535-BDB8-4C48-A756-4A48C4916341%40wustl.edu.
Just to be clear—we have not affiliation with this DCAN fork so I don’t know if it keeps up with the upstream changes in the HCP Pipelines or if it diverged at some point. I personally could not recommend using any forks that do not keep merging in upstream changes as we make bugfixes and improvements all the time to the HCP Pipelines.
Matt.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/CAJ5g80H4-JfO2N%2Bw%3DtZC%3DGhx5%2BDEXwyJXcMTQMkoitVyrqw5hA%40mail.gmail.com.
Adding to that:
I don’t know if output generated by the DCAN fork is fully compatible with the current versions of MR+FIX and MSMAll in the HCPpipelines. It’s possible that the DCAN fork made changes which will either break those downstream pipelines or that the current version of MR+FIX and MSMAll in the HCPpipeline expect certain changes in other pipeline output that wasn’t part of the DCAN fork. Last I checked, the DCAN fork has not been attempting to merge in the ongoing changes/improvements to the HCPpipelines, and it would probably be almost impossible to do so at this point in time.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/humanconnectome.org/d/msgid/hcp-users/C7B3901B-837D-4300-A554-1F1442E04D6E%40wustl.edu.