help
help > RE: Multiple covariates and scanner-correction
Jan 25, 2017 11:01 AM | Himanshu Joshi - National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences
RE: Multiple covariates and scanner-correction
Dear Conn experts,
It would be very helpful to have your comments on my previous mail
Regards
Himanshu Joshi
Originally posted by Himanshu Joshi:
It would be very helpful to have your comments on my previous mail
Regards
Himanshu Joshi
Originally posted by Himanshu Joshi:
Dear Conn users,
Thankyou Alfonso et al., for providing such a wonderful software and regularly customising it on the basis of user requirements.
I have come across different opinions regarding putting categorical variable as covariate in the design. What would be everybody's opinion regarding Question 1 in this thread on the below statements
1. Putting '0' and '1' or 8 channel and 32 channel in this case for the variable 'scanner Type'
or
2. Putting '1' and '2' for 8 channel and 32 channel in this case for the variable 'scanner Type'
or
3. Putting '1' for for the subjects scanned with 8 channel and '0' for the subjects scanned with 32 channel for the variable 'Eight channel' and similarly putting '1' for for the subjects scanned with 32 channel and '0' for the subjects scanned with 8 channel for the variable 'Thity-two channel'
and then how would be the correction procedure in second level model for all the these three cases. I feel the contrast to be entered like
for case 1 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, and ScannerType as [0 0 0 1 0]
for case 2 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, and ScannerType as [0 0 0 1 0]
for case 3 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, Eight channel and Thirty-two channel as [0 0 0 1 0 0]
Which of the three option is recommended for analysis. Your suggestions are valuable
Regards
Himanshu Joshi
Thankyou Alfonso et al., for providing such a wonderful software and regularly customising it on the basis of user requirements.
I have come across different opinions regarding putting categorical variable as covariate in the design. What would be everybody's opinion regarding Question 1 in this thread on the below statements
1. Putting '0' and '1' or 8 channel and 32 channel in this case for the variable 'scanner Type'
or
2. Putting '1' and '2' for 8 channel and 32 channel in this case for the variable 'scanner Type'
or
3. Putting '1' for for the subjects scanned with 8 channel and '0' for the subjects scanned with 32 channel for the variable 'Eight channel' and similarly putting '1' for for the subjects scanned with 32 channel and '0' for the subjects scanned with 8 channel for the variable 'Thity-two channel'
and then how would be the correction procedure in second level model for all the these three cases. I feel the contrast to be entered like
for case 1 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, and ScannerType as [0 0 0 1 0]
for case 2 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, and ScannerType as [0 0 0 1 0]
for case 3 AllSubjects, Iron, Amyloid, IronAmyloid, Eight channel and Thirty-two channel as [0 0 0 1 0 0]
Which of the three option is recommended for analysis. Your suggestions are valuable
Regards
Himanshu Joshi
Threaded View
Title | Author | Date |
---|---|---|
Jiri van Bergen | Nov 3, 2016 | |
Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Nov 4, 2016 | |
Dilip Kumar | Jun 25, 2021 | |
Himanshu Joshi | Jan 12, 2017 | |
Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Jan 27, 2017 | |
Himanshu Joshi | Jan 25, 2017 | |
Jiri van Bergen | Nov 7, 2016 | |