Dear BioEM 2024 delegate, 

Thank you for attending the third annual conference of the BioEM society.  

We strive to continuously improve the annual conference and provide you with the best experience possible. To achieve this, we kindly request your assistance in completing a satisfaction survey. By sharing your thoughts and opinions, you can help us understand what worked well and identify areas for improvement. Please rest assured that all responses will be kept confidential and used solely for internal evaluation purposes. Your anonymity is important to us, and we appreciate your honest feedback. 

We kindly ask that you complete the survey by 31 July 2024 to ensure that your input is included in our analysis. 

Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at office@bioem.org. 

Kind regards, 

BioEM LOC 2024 and BioEM Office 

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

1. Participant

Attendance

• One day
• Whole week

2. General

What did you like the most?

What did you like the least?

What would you improve?

What do you prefer?

• The conference scheduled for 5 days, with Wednesday afternoon and Friday afternoon designated as free periods
• The conference scheduled for 4 days

I had a chance to maintain old and establish new networksAgree completelyAgreeDisagree somewhereDisagree

How many BEMS, EBEA and/or BioEM meetings have you attended before BioEM 2024?DropdownNoneOneTwoThreeMore than three

Do you think that the meeting was a good value for the money? DropdownYesAverageSomewhatNot at all

Do you plan to attend BioEM 2025 in Rennes, France? DropdownYesNoUndecided

What suggestions can you make to the society, BioEM for improving next year's meeting?

3. Online organisation

Please rate the online submission process DropdownVery easyEasySomewhat difficultVery difficultNo opinion

Please rate the online abstract review processDropdownNot a reviewer Very easyEasySomewhat difficultVery difficultNo opinion

For reviewers only

Please rate the scoring sheets for the AwardsDropdownNot a JudgeVery easyEasySomewhat difficultVery difficultNo opinion

For judges only

Please comment on the online organisation:

4. The BioEM 2024 Meeting Program

The number of plenaries/workshops/topics in focus was? DropdownAppropriateToo highToo low

2. Was the session informative and gave a good overview?

Plenary 1: Ed BoydenDropdownOutstanding: Exceeded my expectationsGood: Met my expectationsPoor: Did not meet my expectationsNo opinionNo attended

Optical Tools for Seeing and Controlling Biological Systems

Tutorial 1: Fioravante CaponeDropdownOutstanding: Exceeded my expectationsGood: Met my expectationsPoor: Did not meet my expectationsNo opinionNo attended

Neuroprotective Effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields in Acute Stroke

Workshop 1DropdownOutstanding: Exceeded my expectationsGood: Met my expectationsPoor: Did not meet my expectationsNo opinionNo attended

The European Research Cluster on EMF and Health (CLUE-H): Project goals of NextGEM, ETAIN, SEAWave, and GOLIAT, and strategy of the CLUE-H cluster

Workshop 2DropdownOutstanding: Exceeded my expectationsGood: Met my expectationsPoor: Did not meet my expectationsNo opinionNo attended

From exposure to dose measure: what are suitable concepts for public communication and research

Workshop 3DropdownOutstanding: Exceeded my expectationsGood: Met my expectationsPoor: Did not meet my expectationsNo opinionNo attended

Breakthroughs in numerical and experimental EMF exposure assessment: The contribution of BIOEM young scientists

Student Flash Poster Session DropdownInteresting and good training for studentsnon-essential and double work for students

How was the overall quality of poster and oral presentations and discussions? DropdownExcellentGood Average UnpleasantVery unpleasant

The time allocated for discussions during the sessions was adequateDropdownAgree completelyAgreeDisagree somewhereDisagree No opinion

I obtained more information about the studies from the presentations than from the written summariesDropdownAgree completelyAgreeDisagree somewhereDisagree No opinion

To what degree were your expectations met for the following?

I was informed about new scientific findings in BioelectromagneticsDropdownAgree completelyAgreeDisagree somewhereDisagree No opinion

Please add any additional comments on the scientific content and organisations of presentations:

Please provide the overall appreciation of the meeting quality

1=Poor; 10=Excellent

Please add any additional comments on how the meeting fulfilled or did not fulfil your expectations

5. BioEM 2024 website

Please rate the BioEM 2024 websiteDropdownExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion

6. BioEM 2024 meeting

How was the registration process? DropdownVery easyEasySomewhat difficult Very difficult No opinion

How was travelling to the meeting? DropdownVery easyEasySomewhat difficultVery difficult

Please comment on the program schedule of the meeting *DropdownAppropriateToo tightToo extended

Please rate the following for information quality, availability and completeness

Information and accodomationDropdownExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion

Information on the city, tours and eventsDropdownExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion

Additional comments related to BioEM2024.org

Location and facilities

Meeting rooms DropdownExcellentGood Average UnpleasantVery unpleasant

Coffee breaksDropdownThey were of an appropriate lengthThey should be shorterThey should be longer

Poster arrangement & boardsDropdownExcellentGood Average UnpleasantVery unpleasant

Poster printingDropdownExcellent, please do this every yearNo, I would rather print it myself

Short version of hardcopy Program bookDropdownPlease do this every yearI use both the online and the paper version of the program book I prefer the online version

What was your opinion of the Gala Dinner? DropdownExcellentGood Average UnpleasantVery unpleasant Did not attend

Do you have any feedback regarding the Gala Dinner?

Please comment on the meeting location and facilities:

Submit