Brainstorm workshop survey: Biomag 2012

This was the fourth large-scale Brainstorm workshop. For the first time, we integrated presentations from experimented Brainstorm users. We also distributed a short survey to help us improving the structure and contents of those workshops, and getting general feedback about the software. This page presents the results of this survey.

Survey document: Link

Survey results

Number of participants: 55 Number of returned documents: 42 (76%)

Summary

1. Before today's class, how would you describe your use of Brainstorm:
   • Never used: 45%
   • Some simulation work: 10%
   • Some experimental work: 31%
   • Experience user: 7%
   • NA: 7%
2. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(best) to 5(worst)
   • 1: 52%
   • 2: 26%
   • 3: 12%
   • 4: 7%
   • 5: 0%
   • NA: 2%
3. Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
   • Yes: 52%
   • No: 40%
   • NA: 7%
4. Was today's presentation by other Brainstorm researchers useful in better understand how to apply the software?
   • Yes: 67%
   • No: 24%
   • NA: 10%
5. Immediate plans for using Brainstorm:
   • Yes: 57%
   • No: 0%
   • NA: 43%
6. Particularly enthusiastic responses (explicit congratulations, many exclamation marks, smileys):
   • Yes: 26%

Results encoding

1. 1=Never used, 2:Some simulation work, 3: Some experimental work, 4:Experienced user, 0=NA
2. How helpful: 1(best) to 5(worst), 0=NA
3. Try the online tutorials before coming: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=NA
4. User presentations useful: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=NA
5. Future use: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=NA
6. Extra enthusiasm: 1=No, 2=Yes

Results values

1. 2 4 1 1 3 3 1 1 3 1 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 2 1 3 0 1 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 1 1 3 0 3 1 1 0 1 4 1
2. 3 1 3 2 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 4 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1
3. 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 2 2 1
4. 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 0 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 1 2 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
5. 0 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2
6. 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Comments and suggestions

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

Citations

• "Excellent! How do you fit a mountain into just one day"
• "The online tutorial is excellent, but some details are useful to be seen on class"
• "Very good pace, everything became very clear. Immediate help with individual problems was helpful to follow the further class"
• "Very clear hands-on session, great communication with the audience"
• "Very clear presentation, given at an easy-to-follow pace"
• "Now I can start to analyze my data by myself. I'm happy. Many thanks."
• "Tadel's teaching is very good - more of that!"
• "That was amazing!"
• "Super useful :)"
• "Perfect!"
• "Hope that you will complete the causality tool soon. Extremely interesting option!!!"
• "Fear: very good - Baby: very important"

Comments about the workshop

Pace:

• Very good pace: 7
• A bit rushed at some moments: 2
• Too slow at some moments: 3
• Questions from the audience should be taken at the end of each phase: 1
• Too much time spent on sensors overview / pre-processing: 2

Structure:

• Two-day workshop: 2
• One-week workshop (SPM-like): 1
• Two groups for people with different backgrounds: 1
• Follow-up training with priority to today's participants: 1
• Some time for having people use their own data: 2

User presentations:

• Should be more related to the software and the methods, how the analysis were performed: 9
• Waiting too long before starting the practice / presentations should be after the practice: 3
• Less presentations: 2
• Presentations are not necessary necessary in a one-day workshop: 1

Technical issues:

• Graphic cards problems: 2
• Computer was too slow: 1

Missing topics and requests

• More statistics / group analysis: 7

• More methodological details, good practice & cooking recipes: 5

• More connectivity: 3
• Scripting: 2
• Preparation of the MRI: 2
• EEG analysis: 2
• Medical applications: 1
• Baby/infant MEG analysis: 1
• More time-frequency: 1
• Forward and inverse modeling: 1
• Other source reconstruction methods: 1
• More scientific background for less experienced MEG users: 1
• How to handle multiple runs: 1
• Creating structure of data to plug in already processed data: 1

Missing tools in Brainstorm

• ANOVA, clustering analysis: 1
• Yokogawa MEG160: 1

Planning to use Brainstorm specifically for:

• Connectivity: 10
• Source reconstruction: 5
• Pre-processing: 4
• EEG: 7
• MEG: 5
• Baby/infant: 3
• Epilepsy: 2
• Time-frequency: 2
• Comparison with Matti's MNE: 1

Survey comments

• First question: 1(best) and 5(worst):

  • Very counter-intuitive given the amount of people who wrote 5 saying then "Amazing workshop!" => Converting to ones

  • 4 values with no comments are difficult to interpret
• Question about the tutorials:
  • Not easy to understand given the number off-subject responses
  • Maybe we should just a question about the quality of the online tutorials, not the comparison with the class
• Question about the future use of Brainstorm:
  • Too many people didn't write anything, it was probably too open
  • Maybe we should offer a multiple choice. What are you planning to use Brainstorm for: EEG, MEG, pre-processing, source analysis, time-frequency, connectivity, clinical, research, simulation...