4864
Comment:
|
3804
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 3: | Line 3: |
* ''"'' | * ''"Really clear and well paced. Good job!"'' * ''"Pace was awesome, clarity was good. Loved the interactive basis of the workshop"'' * ''"Very good background and basic explanation, very good commentary on procedures"'' * ''"Good intro, made things very clear"'' * ''"A lot of info, but great job of presenting it clearly"'' * ''"The clarity of the explanation was really good for the allocated time"'' * ''"Information was conveyed at the perfect pace"<<BR>>'' * ''"Excellently executed"'' * ''"Great software! Keep moving forward!!"'' * ''"Food was great! Loved it! Thanks"'' |
Line 6: | Line 15: |
Number of participants: '''40'''<<BR>>Number of returned documents: '''30 '''(75%)<<BR>>[[attachment:workshop_survey.pdf|Link to the pdf document]]. | Number of participants: '''40'''<<BR>>Number of returned documents: '''31 '''(78%)<<BR>>[[attachment:workshop_survey.pdf|Link to the pdf document|&do=get]]. |
Line 10: | Line 19: |
* Never used: 45% * Some simulation work: 10% * Some experimental work: 31% * Experience user: 7% * N/A: 7% 1. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(best) to 5(worst) * 1: 52% * 2: 26% * 3: 12% * 4: 7% * 5: 0% * N/A: 2% |
* '''Never used: 90%''' * Some simulation work: '''3%''' * Some experimental work: '''3%''' * Experienced user: '''4%''' * N/A: '''3%''' 1. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best) * 1: '''0%''' * 2: '''0%''' * 3: '''6%''' * '''4: 61%''' * '''5: 32%''' |
Line 23: | Line 31: |
* Yes: 52% * No: 40% * N/A: 7% 1. Was today's presentation by other Brainstorm researchers useful in better understanding how to apply the software? * Yes: 67% * No: 24% * N/A: 10% 1. Immediate plans for using Brainstorm: * Yes: 57% * No: 0% * N/A: 43% 1. Particularly enthusiastic responses (explicit congratulations, encouragement messages, 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 1. How helpful: 1(best) to 5(worst), 0=N/A 1. Online tutorials before coming: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A 1. User presentations are useful: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A 1. Future use: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A 1. 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 1. 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 1. 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 1. 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 1. 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 1. 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 |
* Yes: '''42%''' * No: '''52%''' * N/A: '''6%''' 1. Interested in using Brainstorm for: * EEG: '''52%''' * MEG: '''87%''' * MEG+EEG: '''51%''' * NIRS: '''0%''' * sEEG/ECoG: '''0%''' * Scripting:''' 66%''' * Pre-processing: '''58%''' * Visualization of recordings: '''58%''' * Source analysis: '''67%''' * Time-frequency: '''58%''' * Functional connectivity: '''71%''' * Statistics: '''39%''' * Research: '''74%''' * Clinical applications: '''29%''' * Epilepsy: '''13%''' * Baby / infant studies: '''3%''' |
Line 57: | Line 56: |
Pace: | * '''Very good pace and clarity: 24''' * A bit rushed in the afternoon: 4 |
Line 59: | Line 59: |
* '''Very good pace: 7''' * A bit rushed at some moments: 2 * Too slow at some moments: 3 * Too much time spent on sensors overview / pre-processing: 2 * Questions from the audience should be taken at the end of each phase: 1 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 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 in a one-day workshop: 1 Technical issues: * Graphic cards problems: 2 * Computer was too slow: 1 |
* A bit too slow in the morning: 3 * Too much for a day: 4 * Request for a few more breaks: 1 * Section on time-frequency less clear than the others: 1 |
Line 86: | Line 65: |
* '''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 |
* More on functional connectivity: 3 * More on different inverse methods: 2 * More on forward modeling (BEM): 1 * More on time-frequency: 1 * Clinical applications / epilepsy: 2 * Processing EEG data / ERPs: 2 * Explain which analysis should be used in which research question: 2 * Export TF/connectivity maps to SPSS: 1 * Study of deep brain structures: 1 * Full group analysis: 1 * Would have been better with Neuromag data: 1 * More activities that require critical thinking rather than following along: 1 * How to import external events files: 1 |
Line 102: | Line 80: |
* ANOVA, clustering analysis: 1 * Yokogawa MEG160 support: 1 |
* '''Development of the functional connectivity: 8''' * Pipeline edition similar to !BrainVision (drag and drop): 2 * Beamformers: 2 * MEG/EEG + fMRI: 2 * Add markers in the imported data: 1 * Easy way to cancel ongoing process: 1 * Better stats: 1 * Allow for behavioral covariates: 1 * Motion correction: 1 |
Line 105: | Line 90: |
=== 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 |
== Technical issues == * Some bugs with the scouts: 5 |
Line 116: | Line 93: |
== Comments about the survey questions == * 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 add 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... |
== Results analysis == === Results encoding === 1. 1=Never used, 2=Some simulation work, 3=Some experimental work, 4=Experienced user, 0=NA 1. How helpful: 1(best) to 5(worst), 0=N/A 1. Online tutorials before coming: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A === Results values === 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1. 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 1. 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 1 1 |
Brainstorm workshop survey: Halifax 2013
Selected comments from attendees:
"Really clear and well paced. Good job!"
"Pace was awesome, clarity was good. Loved the interactive basis of the workshop"
"Very good background and basic explanation, very good commentary on procedures"
"Good intro, made things very clear"
"A lot of info, but great job of presenting it clearly"
"The clarity of the explanation was really good for the allocated time"
"Information was conveyed at the perfect pace"
"Excellently executed"
"Great software! Keep moving forward!!"
"Food was great! Loved it! Thanks"
Survey results
Number of participants: 40
Number of returned documents: 31 (78%)
Link to the pdf document.
Summary
- Before today's class, how would you describe your use of Brainstorm:
Never used: 90%
Some simulation work: 3%
Some experimental work: 3%
Experienced user: 4%
N/A: 3%
- How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
1: 0%
2: 0%
3: 6%
4: 61%
5: 32%
- Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
Yes: 42%
No: 52%
N/A: 6%
- Interested in using Brainstorm for:
EEG: 52%
MEG: 87%
MEG+EEG: 51%
NIRS: 0%
sEEG/ECoG: 0%
Scripting: 66%
Pre-processing: 58%
Visualization of recordings: 58%
Source analysis: 67%
Time-frequency: 58%
Functional connectivity: 71%
Statistics: 39%
Research: 74%
Clinical applications: 29%
Epilepsy: 13%
Baby / infant studies: 3%
Comments and suggestions
The number indicates the number of participants who made similar comments.
Comments about the workshop
Very good pace and clarity: 24
- A bit rushed in the afternoon: 4
- A bit too slow in the morning: 3
- Too much for a day: 4
- Request for a few more breaks: 1
- Section on time-frequency less clear than the others: 1
Missing topics and requests
- More on functional connectivity: 3
- More on different inverse methods: 2
- More on forward modeling (BEM): 1
- More on time-frequency: 1
- Clinical applications / epilepsy: 2
- Processing EEG data / ERPs: 2
- Explain which analysis should be used in which research question: 2
- Export TF/connectivity maps to SPSS: 1
- Study of deep brain structures: 1
- Full group analysis: 1
- Would have been better with Neuromag data: 1
- More activities that require critical thinking rather than following along: 1
- How to import external events files: 1
Missing tools in Brainstorm
Development of the functional connectivity: 8
Pipeline edition similar to BrainVision (drag and drop): 2
- Beamformers: 2
- MEG/EEG + fMRI: 2
- Add markers in the imported data: 1
- Easy way to cancel ongoing process: 1
- Better stats: 1
- Allow for behavioral covariates: 1
- Motion correction: 1
Technical issues
- Some bugs with the scouts: 5
Results analysis
Results encoding
- 1=Never used, 2=Some simulation work, 3=Some experimental work, 4=Experienced user, 0=NA
- How helpful: 1(best) to 5(worst), 0=N/A
- Online tutorials before coming: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A
Results values
- 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
- 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 5
- 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 1 1