FEAT Design
List of available sections:
- 1) First-level analysis
- A. Misc tab
- B. Data tab
- C. Pre-stats tab
- D. Stats tab
- E. Post-stats tab
- F. Registration tab
1) First-level analysis
Some aspects of the single-subject FEAT analysis, which have been discussed by the Lab members, are summarised here .
A. MISC
No recommendation, yet.
B. DATA
No recommendation, yet.
C. PRE-STATS
C.3 B0 unwarping
Fieldmapping and EPI parameters (all numbers in ms):
| Avanto | Symphony | |
|---|---|---|
| EPI TE | 41 | 40 |
| GREFIELDMAP TE LOWER | 5.77 | 6.11 |
| GREFIELDMAP TE UPPER | 10.53 | 10.87 |
| GREFIELDMAP TE DELTA | 4.76 | 4.76 |
| EPI ECHO SPACING | 0.69 | 0.56 |
C.3.1 Fieldmap
Insert FieldmapRad (processed image in Rad, see dcmConvert.sh)
C.3.2 Fieldmap Mag
Insert FieldmapMag_brain (brain-extracted Magnitude image, see dcmConvert.sh)
C.3.3 Effective EPI echo spacing (ms)
See the table above.
C.3.4 EPI TE (ms)
See the table above.
C.3.5 Unwarp direction
Use -y.
C.3.6 Signal loss threshold
Leave default 10 % (discussion needed).
D. STATS
D.6 Full model
D.6.1.8 Convolution
Double-Gamma HRF is the preffered option. Discussion: “the FSL double gamma function uses the parameters from the Glover 1999 paper and is the same as the default canonical HRF used by SPM. We've done some testing with it relative to the single gamma, and couldn't find a single case where the single gamma was a better fit. The paper is being revised at the moment so there is nothing to cite as yet, but you picked the better HRF function. I typically cite the glover paper. Interestingly, even the Boyton 1996 paper that introduced the single gamma clearly shows an undershoot in the data, although the authors didn't model it.” Joseph T. Devlin, Ph.D. 24. September 2009 11:33 FSL@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
E. POST-STATS
No recommendation, yet.
F. REGISTRATION
No recommendation, yet.
upol.cz
