Evaluation of long-term effects

[arokem]

Does anyone have ideas for evaluation of impact at longer times after the event?

Has anyone done something like this with AHW participants? I am curious to hear what participants think a few months down the line and was thinking of asking them to fill out another survey in early/mid 2017. But interested to also do comparisons in terms of software participation, publication of data and other scientific products, etc. (with the control group being applicants who did not participate perhaps?)

[arokem]

Anecdotal evidence that participants in NHW became contributors to established open-source project following NHW:

https://github.com/tsalo?tab=overview&from=2016-04-01&to=2016-04-30&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://github.com/nipy/dipy/pull/1114

[davidwhogg]

One point Ethnography & Evaluation made to us is that it is just as important to track the people who applied but didn't come as the ones who came. This might require that we warn people of this up-front on the application form, and let them opt out (or not).

[kesshijordan]

A simple metric is how many (especially first-time-hackathoners) go on to do other hackathons, compared to equivalent non-attendees... NHW is a nice starter hackathon... anecdotally, it gave me the confidence to apply to BrainHack LA, which I doubt I would have done, otherwise. I wouldn't be surprised if this were true for others.

[arokem]

Also, papers that came out of NHW16:

• http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811917302707

• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314875306_How_much_motion_is_too_much_motion_Determining_motion_thresholds_by_sample_size_for_reproducibility_in_developmental_resting-state_MRI

• https://riojournal.com/articles.php?id=12394

• https://riojournal.com/article/13394/

[arokem]

4/13 recipients of travel awards for the OHBM 2017 hackathon were participants in NHW16: https://ohbm.github.io/hackathon2017/

[Edited to correct the number of total recipients]