Brainstorm workshop survey: Concordia 2018

Selected comments from attendees

• Very clear and helpful explanations.

• It was great.

• I really would like to thank the organizers. Bravo.

Survey results

Number of participants: 60
Number of filled surveys: 20

Summary

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

   • Never used: 55%

   • Some simulation work: 5%
   • Some experimental work: 35%
   • Experienced user: 5%
2. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 20%

   • 4: 55%

   • 5: 25%
3. How was the clarity of the presentation: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 15%

   • 4: 50%

   • 5: 35%
4. How was the pace of the presentation:
   • Way too slow: 0%
   • A bit too slow: 0%

   • Good pace: 50%

   • A bit too fast: 50%

   • Way too fast: 0%
5. Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
   • Yes: 25%

   • No: 75%

6. If applicable, how would you rate the online tutorial: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 22.2%

   • 4: 44.4%

   • 5: 33.3%
7. Interested in using Brainstorm for:
   • EEG: 100%
   • MEG: 35%
   • MEG+EEG: 30%
   • NIRS: 30%
   • sEEG/ECoG: 10%
   • Scripting: 15%
   • Pre-processing: 25%
   • Visualization of recordings: 25%
   • Source analysis: 40%
   • Time-frequency: 30%
   • Functional connectivity: 30%
   • Statistics: 20%
   • Research: 30%
   • Clinical applications: 5%
   • Epilepsy: 20%
   • Baby / infant studies: 5%
   • Aging: 5%

Suggestions

Missing topics and requests

• Explanation on experimental paradigm.
• How to import data preprocessed with other software.

Missing tools in Brainstorm

• More time-series options for oscillatory patterns.