| 1 | Jun 29, 2009 7:51 PM | My impression was that clinicians attended the sessions for engineers and vice versa, so the targeted groups did not really play along. |
| 2 | Jun 29, 2009 9:32 PM | n/a for me |
| 3 | Jun 30, 2009 6:19 AM | It's existence was good, but I didn't like the fact that it was on the same time with the Engineering/Math/Physics for MDs didactic course. |
| 4 | Jun 30, 2009 8:44 AM | I think it worked well, but then I chaired part of it so am not an independent judge |
| 5 | Jun 30, 2009 9:21 AM | the overlap was not a good choice. all talks were interesting and it was extremely hard to decide where to go... |
| 6 | Jun 30, 2009 9:29 AM | It would be nice to get an overview of current state of the art seizure detection/prediction EEG features. |
| 7 | Jun 30, 2009 11:36 AM | see above. It should be continued in next Workshops. |
| 8 | Jun 30, 2009 2:07 PM | This was a very good idea. But rather than separate the two courses, it may be good to integrate them so that people with both backgrounds are present for feedback. However, time may be a concern. |
| 9 | Jun 30, 2009 5:28 PM | It's very good, and can have a little more, specifically more from epilepsy clinicals. |
| 10 | Jun 30, 2009 5:37 PM | It's very good, and can have a little more, specifically more from epilepsy clinicals. |
| 11 | Jun 30, 2009 8:00 PM | Alas, I did not attend this and from the comments I heard afterward I wish I did! The comments were uniformly spectacular. |
| 12 | Jul 1, 2009 5:44 PM | No. |
| 13 | Jul 2, 2009 1:43 AM | (see above) |
| 14 | Jul 4, 2009 6:13 AM | For me it was fine, although I would have liked to take them both, there is always something to learn no matter the background, because the theories and tools are applied on a specific subject. |
| 15 | Jul 6, 2009 9:47 AM | some presentations well done, in others I was missing the didactic aspect |
| 16 | Jul 6, 2009 8:34 PM | Although I was only able to attend part of the sessions, they were very effective for a layman such as myself. |
| 17 | Jul 8, 2009 12:28 PM | Excellent refresher course. |
| 18 | Jul 8, 2009 7:50 PM | it was good |
| 19 | Jul 8, 2009 8:20 PM | quite informative, but can be compressed. a few talks dragged on. perhaps use scalp eeg to see if audience are losing interest and have speakers adapt! |
| 20 | Jul 9, 2009 8:50 AM | Would have liked to see both the engineers and the MD course. As this was my first IWSP conference it would have been nice to get overview of both fields. |
| 22 | Jul 10, 2009 5:36 AM | Just about the right mix of technical and non-technical material. |
| 23 | Jul 10, 2009 9:08 PM | don't like concurrent sessions |
| 24 | Jul 12, 2009 5:38 PM | Perhaps some more introductory |
| 25 | Jul 22, 2009 2:05 PM | Could not attend because I was in the other session. In general: Very important. Should be continued. The material should be made available to the participants prior to the meeting. |
| 26 | Jul 24, 2009 5:10 PM | see above |
| 27 | Jul 24, 2009 6:04 PM | No |
| 28 | Jul 24, 2009 7:00 PM | More tutorial style talks |
| 29 | Jul 25, 2009 8:35 AM | Just fine, maybe more demonstrative with use of software and multimedia. |
| 30 | Jul 27, 2009 6:24 AM | In general it's good but for me some of them are so difficult to follow in class |
| 31 | Jul 28, 2009 11:10 PM | This session and the presenters was/were Superb. I learned so much that allowed me to have the right context for the rest of the meeting. This session should be required for all attendees as I have had discussions with physicians who, it turns out, do not seem to understand the limitations of surface EEG. |
| 32 | Aug 5, 2009 3:32 PM |
Some lectures could have been more didactic. |