Form 1 2018 BRAIN PI meeting

OMB# 0925-0642 Exp. Date: 05/2020

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: NIH, Project Clearance Branch, 6705 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7974, Bethesda, MD 20892-7974, ATTN: PRA (0925-0642). Do not return the completed form to this address.

On behalf of the organizing committee, we would like to thank you for your participation and contributions to the 2018 BRAIN Initiative Investigators Meeting. We would like you to take a brief moment to answer a few questions and provide comments (optional) regarding your meeting experience. This feedback will help us in the planning and improvement of future meetings so we can better meet your needs. We hope you share our excitement about the progress the BRAIN Initiative has already shown, and we appreciate your efforts towards its success.

Thank you for your time,

BRAIN Investigators Meeting '18 Organizing Committee

1. Please indicate your overall satisfaction with the 2018 BRAIN PI Meeting:

Very Satisfied

Somewhat Satisfied

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

2. Please indicate your overall satisfaction with the 2018 BRAIN PI Meeting Plenary Addresses (8:30am-9:30am Mon-Wed, 5:40-6:30pm Mon/Tues):

Very Satisfied

Somewhat Satisfied

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

3. Please indicate which Research Highlight Talk Track(s) you attended on Day 1 (April 9^th) from (1:00pm-2:15pm and/or 2:20pm-3:35pm):

Track 1: Cells and Circuits

Track 2: Recording, Modulation, and Imaging Technologies

Track 3: Understanding the Brain

Did not attend any of these

4. Regarding the Research Highlight Talks you attended on Day 1 (April 9^th), how would you rate the following items:

   1. Quality of the presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

   2. The length of presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

   3. Opportunity for question, answer and exchange of ideas (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

5. Please indicate which Assorted Sessions you attended on Day 1 (April 9^th) from (3:45pm-5:15pm):

BRAIN Initiative Cell Census Network: Updates from a Mini-brain Cell Atlas and Looking Forward

Diversity and Inclusivity: A Priority for the BRAIN Initiative

Getting Technologies to Researchers: How to Commercialize Research Tools

Did not attend any of these

6. Regarding the Assorted Session(s) you attended on Day 1 (April 9^th) from (3:45pm-5:15pm), how would you rate the following items:

   1. Quality of the session panel/presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

   2. How relevant/useful was the session topic, information and discussion to your research? (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

7. If you have feedback for the session(s) you attended, particularly with regard to what might be done moving forward, please describe:

8. Please indicate which Assorted Session(s) you attended on Day 2 (April 10^th) from (3:45pm-5:15pm):

Network Neuromodulation

Neuroethics Guiding Principles for the NIH BRAIN Initiative: A Town Hall

Visualizing the Sensorimotor Integration of Action Strategies Across Species

Did not attend any of these

9. Regarding the Assorted Session(s) you attended on Day 2 (April 10^th) from (3:45pm-5:15pm), how would you rate the following items:

   1. Quality of the session panel/presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

   2. How relevant/useful was the session topic, information and discussion to your research? (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

10. If you have feedback for the session(s) you attended, particularly with regard to what might be done moving forward, please describe:

11. Please indicate which Research Highlight Talk Track(s) you attended on Day 2 (April 10^th) from (1:00pm-2:15pm and/or 2:20pm-3:35pm):

Track 1: Cells and Circuits

Track 2: Recording, Modulation, and Imaging Technologies

Track 3: Understanding the Brain

Did not attend any of these

12. Regarding the Research Highlight Talks you attended on Day 2 (Dec 10^th), how would you rate the following items:

    1. Quality of the presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    2. The length of presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    3. Opportunity for question, answer and exchange of ideas (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

13. Please indicate if you attended the Plenary Session on Day 3 (April 11^th) from (8:30am-9:30am):

I attended the Re-Visioning the NIH BRAIN Initiative Town Hall

Did not attend this session.

14. Regarding the Plenary Session you attended on Day 3 (April 11^th) from (8:30am-9:30am), how would you rate the following items:

    1. Quality of the session panel/presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    2. How relevant/useful was the session topic, information and discussion to your research? (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

15. If you have feedback for the new BRAIN Working Group regarding their efforts to revisit the strategic plan for the BRAIN Initiative at NIH, please describe here and/or email BRAINfeedback@nih.gov:

16. Please indicate which Assorted Session(s) you attended on Day 3 (April 11^th) from (1:45pm-3:15pm):

Beyond Fast Transmission: New Approaches to Image Behaviorally-relevant Neuromodulators in the Brain at Diverse Timescales

Data Coordination and Data Resources for the BRAIN Initiative

Lessons from Early First in Human Device Trials

Did not attend any of these

17. Regarding the Assorted Session(s) you attended on Day 3 (April 11^th) from (1:45pm-3:15pm), how would you rate the following items:

    1. Quality of the session panel/presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    2. How relevant/useful was the session topic, information and discussion to your research? (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

18. If you have feedback for the session(s) you attended, particularly with regard to what might be done moving forward, please describe:

19. On Day 3 (April 11^th) please indicate which of the Agency-Specific Breakouts(s) you attended (3:30pm-5:30pm):

The Human Brain Project: European Neuroscience, Infrastructure, Highlights, and Collaboration Opportunities

NIH: BRAIN Initiative Informatics Infrastructure

DARPA’s Neurotechnology Portfolio

NSF: Coordinating Research and Infrastructure Projects for Transformative Neuroscience

International Brain Initiative

NSF: Strategies for Understanding Neural and Cognitive Systems: Proposing NCS Frontiers

NSF’s NeuroNex: Challenges in Resource Sharing and Dissemination

Did not attend any of these

20. Regarding the Agency-Specific Breakouts(s) you attended on Day 3 (April 11^th), how would you rate the following items:

    1. Quality of the session panel/presentations (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    2. How relevant/useful was the session topic, information and discussion to your research? (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

21. If you attend the poster sessions on Day 1, Day 2, and/or Day 3 of the meeting, how would you rate the following:

    1. The organization (e.g. duration, materials provided, etc.) of the poster session (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

    2. Opportunity for question, answer and exchange of ideas (Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor)

22. Having attended this meeting, please provide your thoughts on the following questions:

    1. In what scientific area(s) is there a need for the BRAIN Initiative to support research training/education in order to accelerate research in the high-priority areas identified by participating federal agencies?

    2. What tools, technologies, or methods that have been created/enhanced under the auspices of this Initiative are sufficiently developed to be included in a research education program?

23. Please provide feedback as to the things that you found useful/informative, topic areas you found less helpful or missing, suggestions for future break-out session themes, and/or other suggestions for the improvement of future meetings.