Difference between revisions of "Multi"

From NAMIC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Update from Wiki)
 
m (Update from Wiki)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
* '''Feb 11, 2005''' (J. MacFall)
+
'''Attendants:'''
−
** James & Jorge met over the phone for updates
 
−
** The Duke scanners that will be used for lesion reproducibility are: GE 1.5T, GE 4T, Siemens 3T
 
−
** Subjects: (number?) subjects will be scanned at each of the three scanners twice in a 6-month period. I expect to begin recruitment soon and imaging in late March or early April.
 
−
** Acquisition Protocols:
 
−
*** 3D T1: FLASH 30deg/5deg for 1.5T. Needs feedback from Anders re 3T & Allen re 4T
 
−
*** 2D FSE T2/PD
 
−
*** 2D FLAIR
 
−
** Analysis: G. Gerig's multi-spectral segmentation tool (lesion, CSF, WM, GM) will be used to look at reproducibility across platforms.
 
−
** We have been focusing on the administrative matters of getting the contract finalized. This could not be done without the calibration IRB being finalized and I am happy to report that we now have the IRB in place (Biomedical Informatics Research Network (BIRN) Imaging Reproducibility Study, Duke IRB # 6789-05-2R0). This now allows the Duke contract to be finalized.
 
−
** We reviewed Duke's [[Active_Collaborations|Active Collaborations]]
 
−
** It was clarified that the Morph BIRN grant 'cuts' reflect simply the new grant cycle that NCRR made for us, so that the budget period is from 09/30/2004 - 05/31/2005 (8 months instead of 12, so it looks like a 33% cut if you think that it corresponds to a full calendar year).
 
  
−
<br />
+
* J. Turner, G. Alva, R. Gollub, P. Golland, M. Miller, M. Perry, B. Rosen, R. Buckner, C. Fennema-Notestine (leader)
  
−
* '''Jan 6, 2005''' (J. MacFall)
+
<br />'''Updates from this Working Group:''' [[Multi-site_AD|Multi-site AD]]
−
** Budget cut is being discussed and we are meeting Friday to figure out how to modify Duke's objectives
+
 
−
** IRB used for the grant submission is not suitable for grant so we have submitted a new one that will require full board review. It may be approved in February 2005.
+
<br />'''Topics:'''
−
** We have a large group of suitable subjects but we have to get permission from the IRB to use the list generated for another study.
+
 
 +
* Introduction and review of project goals for new participants
 +
* Review available information gathered in Excel spreadsheet.
 +
* For each of the sites (MGH, WashU, UCI, UCSD), review data sharing & publication constraints
 +
* Define initial scientific clinical aims
 +
* Review what data analyses will be needed and how these will be led
 +
* This project may be able to provide Polina data for testing her classification tools
  
 
<br />
 
<br />

Revision as of 13:35, 18 December 2006

Home < Multi

Attendants:

  • J. Turner, G. Alva, R. Gollub, P. Golland, M. Miller, M. Perry, B. Rosen, R. Buckner, C. Fennema-Notestine (leader)


Updates from this Working Group: Multi-site AD


Topics:

  • Introduction and review of project goals for new participants
  • Review available information gathered in Excel spreadsheet.
  • For each of the sites (MGH, WashU, UCI, UCSD), review data sharing & publication constraints
  • Define initial scientific clinical aims
  • Review what data analyses will be needed and how these will be led
  • This project may be able to provide Polina data for testing her classification tools


Retrieved from "https://www.na-mic.org/w/index.php?title=Multi&oldid=4097"