AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

|
March 25, 2015 12:31PM
Anita,

This is an interesting question!

Most investigators in the field are usually obsessed with the statistical values, and pay little attention to the effect estimates. The range of effect estiamtes (e.g., percent signal change) varies across experimental types (event-related vs. block), experimental conditions, brain regions, subjects and groups. If you just use one effect estimate (e.g., beta value) for each condition, it might be hard to establish a criterion or cutoff for outliers. I can think of two possible methods. One possible solution is to downgrade those potential outliers with, for example, option -model_outliers in 3dMEMA. Another approach is to model the hemodynamic response with a model-free method (e..g, TENT or CSPLIN in 3dDeconvolve), and use the signature HDR shape as an identifier for anomalies or head motion effects.

Gang
Subject Author Posted

Reasonable Percent Signal Change Values

acservenka March 24, 2015 07:29PM

Re: Reasonable Percent Signal Change Values

gang March 25, 2015 12:31PM

Re: Reasonable Percent Signal Change Values

Cesar Caballero Gaudes March 25, 2015 05:17PM