Brainstorm workshop survey: Toronto 2015

Selected comments from attendees

• "Clear and concise"
• "Very clear, lots of info"
• "Pace was perfect, enough time to try and understand what we were looking at"
• "I think everything I wanted to learn about was covered!"
• "Amazing job!"

Survey results

Number of participants: 40
Number of returned documents: 28 (70%)
Link to the pdf document.

Summary

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

   • Never used: 86%

   • Some simulation work: 7%
   • Some experimental work: 7%
   • Experienced user: 0%
2. How helpful was the class in learning Brainstorm: 1(worst) to 5(best)
   • 1: 0%
   • 2: 0%
   • 3: 0%
   • 4: 32%

   • 5: 68%

3. Did you try the online tutorial before coming to class:
   • Yes: 21%
   • No: 71%
4. Interested in using Brainstorm for:
   • EEG: 36%
   • MEG: 96%
   • MEG+EEG: 18%
   • NIRS: 4%
   • sEEG/ECoG: 14%
   • Scripting: 25%
   • Pre-processing: 75%
   • Visualization of recordings: 64%
   • Source analysis: 68%
   • Time-frequency: 64%
   • Functional connectivity: 60%
   • Statistics: 36%
   • Research: 71%
   • Clinical applications: 29%
   • Epilepsy: 21%
   • Baby / child studies: 11%

Comments and suggestions

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

Comments about the workshop

• Good clarity: 20

• Good pace: 16
  

• A bit slow: 4
• A bit fast: 2
• Need more time: 2
• Time-frequency/connectivity part could be improved: 1
• Handouts more detailed: 1

Missing topics and requests

• Resting state: 2
• More on statistics: 2
• More on scripting: 1
• More on connectivity: 1
• Group analysis: 1
• PAC: 1
• Filtering: 1
• Writing plugin modules: 1
• Export NIfTI files: 1

Missing tools in Brainstorm

• Beamforming: 8

• More statistics: 4

• Head motion detection and correction: 2
• More connectivity measures: 2
• Child template: 1

Technical issues

• One win64 computer crashing randomly with 2014b compiled, working with 2012b compiled
• Packaged binaries: missing scripts

Results analysis

Results encoding

1. 1=Never used, 2=Some simulation work, 3=Some experimental work, 4=Experienced user, 0=NA
2. How helpful: 1(worst) to 5(best), 0=N/A
3. Online tutorials before coming: 1=No, 2=Yes, 0=N/A

Results values

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