MEG-BIDS community survey

JavaScript isn't enabled in your browser, so this file can't be opened. Enable and reload.

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) studies produce enormous amounts of data that need to be stored, organized and analyzed. However, naming conventions and metadata are often incomplete or inexistent, which is an impediment to the transfer of scientific data and knowledge, the reproducibility of research results, and the curation of large data repositories with entries from heterogenous origins. Building on recent efforts from the MRI community, MEG-BIDS is a proposition to standardize the arrangement of data structures in MEG.
Please refer to the MEG-BIDS manuscript and to the MEG-BIDS detailed specifications for all details concerning the proposed structure:
- MEG-BIDS Manuscript:
http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/08/08/172684
- MEG-BIDS Specifications:
http://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2017/08/08/172684.DC1/172684-1.pdf

We wish to survey the MEG community on its present needs with respect to data management, and design the MEG-BIDS standard to best respond to these presently unmet needs.

Your participation is truly appreciated.

University *

1. Are you interested in a common standard for MEG data organization, which goal is to facilitate data archiving and sharing? *

Yes

Other:

2. What are the main issues you are presently facing with respect to data management (select all that apply) *

Data curation: I spend too much time trying to harmonise data organization across my studies. This impacts data retrieval and reuse negatively.

Lost data: It happens that some of my data is lost or that the metadata (behavioral events, experimental conditions, etc.) is not retrievable, which prevents data reuse.

Usage of data analysis software: I think data analytics could be improved if the software I use could automatically register or parse new data, if it is organized in a standard way.

Data sharing: I think sharing data organized in a standard way would contribute to augmenting research productivity and quality.

None of the issues above apply to me

Other:

Required

3. With proper documentation and software tools, would you be willing to try the MEG-BIDS with your own data? *

Yes

If NOT likely: What stops you?

Too much effort

No benefits

Lack of examples

Lack of validation tools

Other:

4. Does the specification cover all aspects of the experimental designs you employ?

Yes

Other:

Clear selection

If NOT: What is missing?

5. What software(s) are you using for analyzing MEG data?

Brainstorm

EEGlab

MNE python

FieldTrip

SPM

Your own scripts

BESA

Curry

Other:

6. Which manufacturer produces your MEG equipment?

CTF

Elekta/Neuromag

4D neuroimaging/BTi

KIT/Yokogawa

KRISS

ITAB

Other:

7. Would you like to be involved in further development of the specification?

Yes

Clear selection

8. Other comments:

If you want to be kept updated, leave your email. Thanks!

Submit

Clear form

Never submit passwords through Google Forms.

This form was created inside of Centro de Tecnología Biomédica.

Does this form look suspicious? Report

Forms