Brainstorm workshop survey: Concordia 2018
Selected comments from attendees
TODO
Survey results
Number of participants: 90
Number of filled surveys: 20
Summary
- 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%
- How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
- 1: 0%
- 2: 0%
- 3: 20%
4: 55%
- 5: 25%
- How was the clarity of the presentation: 1(worst) to 5(best)
- 1: 0%
- 2: 0%
- 3: 15%
4: 50%
- 5: 35%
- Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
- Yes: 75%
- No: 25%
- 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%
Comments and suggestions
The number indicates the number of participants who made similar comments.
Comments about the workshop
- Good clarity: 7
- Good pace: 11
- Sometimes too fast: 9
- Sometimes too slow: 2
- Two days would be better: 2
- More information about process options: 2
Missing topics and requests
- Statistics: 4
- EEG topics: 3
- More information on source methods: 3
- Group analysis: 2
- Resting-state analysis: 2
- Cross-frequency coupling: 1
- Best practices: 1
- More time on data collection and registration: 1
- Epilespy: 1
- More connectivity methods: 1
- More scripting: 1
- Individual research question session: 1
Missing tools in Brainstorm
- Automated rejection of artifacts: 1
- PET and fMRI co-registration: 1
- Anatomy preprocessing: 1
Conversion to EEGLAB / FieldTrip file formats: 1
- More advanced and customized graphing: 1
- Getting eye movement data from BDF files: 1
- Categorizing publications on the website: 1
- Single-trial analysis: 1
- More video tutorials: 1