poldrack
commented
7 years ago I would do the defacing after motion correction cheers rp
On Jul 31, 2017, at 2:51 AM, Xiangzhen Kong notifications@github.com wrote:
A nice tool! I am thinking of whether the defacing would affect the following data analysis. For example, when aligning the template file to the input file (4D, reference in flirt), only the first volume is used for the registrition. So the defacing could work pefect for the first volume. But if head motion exists in the 4D file, this defacing would lead to masking differently for each following volumes. I am not sure whether this different masking for each volume would affect the motion correction of the defaced data. Perhaps, it would be better to do the defacing after motion correction. What do you think about this issue?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/poldracklab/pydeface/issues/10, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA1KkPKZMq38k6e5uXFWImGk7xlF39Avks5sTaOFgaJpZM4OoJp0.
— Russell A. Poldrack Albert Ray Lang Professor of Psychology Professor (by courtesy) of Computer Science Bldg. 420, Jordan Hall Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305
russpold@stanford.edu mailto:russpold@stanford.edu http://www.poldracklab.org/ http://www.poldracklab.org/
A nice tool! I am thinking of whether the defacing would affect the following data analysis. For example, when aligning the template file to the input file (4D, reference in flirt), only the first volume is used for the registrition. So the defacing could work pefect for the first volume. But if head motion exists in the 4D file, this defacing would lead to masking differently for each following volumes. I am not sure whether this different masking for each volume would affect the motion correction of the defaced data. Perhaps, it would be better to do the defacing after motion correction. What do you think about this issue?