Brainstorm workshop survey: Geneva 2015

Selected comments from attendees

Survey results

Number of participants: 30
Number of returned documents: 22 (73%)
Link to the pdf document.

Summary

1. Before today's class, how would you describe your use of Brainstorm:
   • Never used: 55%
   • Some simulation work: 22%
   • Some experimental work: 22%
   • Experienced user: 0%
2. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 5%

   • 4: 45%

   • 5: 55%

3. Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
   • Yes: 36%
   • No: 64%
4. Interested in using Brainstorm for:
   • EEG: 86%
   • MEG: 18%
   • MEG+EEG: 9%
   • NIRS: 5%
   • sEEG/ECoG: 18%
   • Scripting: 32%
   • Pre-processing: 36%
   • Visualization of recordings: 59%
   • Source analysis: 73%
   • Time-frequency: 77%
   • Functional connectivity: 64%
   • Statistics: 45%
   • Research: 36%
   • Clinical applications: 27%
   • Epilepsy: 18%
   • Baby / infant studies: 18%

Comments and suggestions

The number indicates the number of participants who made similar comments.

Comments about the workshop

• Good clarity:

• Good pace:

• A bit slow:
• Uneven pace:
• Need more short breaks:
• Too much time on personal questions:
• Some advertised topics were not covered:
• Need more time / two days:

Missing topics and requests

• Connectivity:
• EEG examples (digitizer, ECoG positions):
• EEG/SEEG examples (recordings):
• Interface with command line Matlab:
• More on frequency analysis:

Missing tools in Brainstorm

• Integration with fMRI:
• Realtime processing and display: