Brainstorm workshop survey: Baltimore, USA 2019

Survey results

Number of participants: 26
Number of returned documents: 15
Link to the pdf document.

Summary

1. Before today's class, how would you describe your use of Brainstorm:

   • Never used: 73%

   • Some simulation work: 7%
   • Some experimental work: 7%
   • Experienced user: 13%
2. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 7%
   • 4: 13%

   • 5: 80%

3. Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
   • Yes: 33%
   • No: 67%
4. Interested in using Brainstorm for:
   • EEG: 86%
   • MEG: 0%
   • MEG+EEG: 7%
   • NIRS: 14%
   • sEEG/ECoG: 21%
   • Scripting: 21%
   • Pre-processing: 71%
   • Visualization of recordings: 79%
   • Source analysis: 57%
   • Time-frequency: 50%
   • Functional connectivity: 57%
   • Statistics: 57%
   • Research: 50%
   • Clinical applications: 36%
   • Epilepsy: 14%
   • Baby / infant studies: 0%

Comments and suggestions

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

Comments about the workshop

• Good clarity: 10
• Good pace: 9
• Sometimes too fast: 3
• More time spent on theoretical lectures

Missing topics and requests

• More time spent on statistics: 3
• More time spent on connectivity: 2
• Explanations on underlying math formulas of methods used
• Considerations of processing large recordings

Missing tools in Brainstorm

• To combine electrophysiology with fMRI data
• A robust pre-processing code-based pipeline
• Tutorial on ECoG data
• Deep Brain Stimulation