Tweet
>From 4-7 November I attended the annual conference of the IEEE-EMBS
(Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society) in New Orleans, Louisiana.
This conference had a wide variety of topics, divided into 27 tracks.
There were in total about 1000 presentations (16 simultaneous sessions)
and 1200 participants. Only 3 of the 27 tracks were related to
biomechanics: biomechanics, biomaterials and neuromuscular systems.
There were however some interesting papers in other areas, for instance
on EMG signal processing.
In general, the presentations were mostly about "clinical engineering",
and basic research was not well covered, apart from a few exceptions.
The disadvantage of having so many topics is that in a single field (in
this case biomechanics), there are not enough participants and
interesting papers to have a certain "critical mass" that is necessary
for a fruitful interchange of information. An advantage is that you can
learn about completely different areas of biomedical engineering, which
can be very interesting.
The policy of the EMBS is presumably to cover the whole field of
biomedical engineering, but in my opinion a conference with a few well-
defined subjects would be more interesting. Any other opinions?
Ton van den Bogert bitnet: WWDONIC@HEITUE5
Department of Veterinary Anatomy
University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
(Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society) in New Orleans, Louisiana.
This conference had a wide variety of topics, divided into 27 tracks.
There were in total about 1000 presentations (16 simultaneous sessions)
and 1200 participants. Only 3 of the 27 tracks were related to
biomechanics: biomechanics, biomaterials and neuromuscular systems.
There were however some interesting papers in other areas, for instance
on EMG signal processing.
In general, the presentations were mostly about "clinical engineering",
and basic research was not well covered, apart from a few exceptions.
The disadvantage of having so many topics is that in a single field (in
this case biomechanics), there are not enough participants and
interesting papers to have a certain "critical mass" that is necessary
for a fruitful interchange of information. An advantage is that you can
learn about completely different areas of biomedical engineering, which
can be very interesting.
The policy of the EMBS is presumably to cover the whole field of
biomedical engineering, but in my opinion a conference with a few well-
defined subjects would be more interesting. Any other opinions?
Ton van den Bogert bitnet: WWDONIC@HEITUE5
Department of Veterinary Anatomy
University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.