840 karma · joined July 27, 2011
I still see somewhat of a product gap in this whole area when selling into clinics but that can likely be solved with time.
It took a long time to grow out of this feeling. These days I get a lot of joy from management. I try to look at myself like a coach on a sports team. I may not be on the field but I feel good when we win knowing the work I have done to help my team succeed.
I would agree with the author that the feedback loop is different. It is also often slower and more subtle. That doesn't however mean that it's not there. Perhaps the author is new to management, perhaps the author just really likes being an IC. Their journey is their own but I would certainly say there are many paths to endorphins as a manager, even as a manager of managers.
I've worked with a lot of people in the medical world while developing SaMD (software as a medical device) in the past that had little to no idea about software. They can apply the principles in the abstract but will likely not dig deep enough to catch some very major issues.
In the medical world, things like post market surveillance and notification of adverse events help to at least create a public feedback loop here. I think we will need something similar in this space if we really want to see more than a surface level, checklist ticking exercise.
A (mostly) weekly podcast we've been doing for almost a year now. Trying to cover a mix of next, papers and releases through the lens of two previous founders of an AI company.
During my PhD this issue came up amongst those in the group looking into compressed sensing in MRI. Many reconstruction methods (AI being a modern variant) work well because a best guess is visually plausible. These kinds of methods fall apart when visually plausible and "true" are different in a meaningful way. The simplest examples here being the numbers in scanned documents, or in the MRI case, areas of the brain where "normal brain tissue" was on average more plausible than "tumor".
[1]: http://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres_...
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8xK8kBHHUX43VVxO3b7s...
That desire for perfection can also be a desire to be done. To have it finished and get closure. It's hard to accept that some things are going to take a long time or a lifetime.
For some ideas the biggest risk is the market, does anyone want this? For others it might be the technology, is this even possible?
In a lot of cases you can do things to reduce those risks and give yourself more confidence to jump ship and go all in. That might be talking to people, it might be reading academic papers. In some cases, but honestly pretty rarely, it will be building something. Most of the time that can come later.
Not dismissing any of the great advice in here already around non-compete, company IP etc. most of this kind of work (research, conversations etc) isn't something your employer can "lock down" as concretely as an MVP. Plus if it is tangential to your current job and your idea doesn't work it, you may still end up better off from having learned something new.
Is there any way to preview what is in the member magazine? It looks compelling but hard to tell if it crosses into purchase territory from the outside.
Writing mainly about AI and healthcare these days. Using ghost (hosted) after many years of picking a new platform every time I felt compelled to write more.
- http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html - http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html - https://www.tor.com/2010/08/05/divided-by-infinity/
I'm also aware of at least one upcoming trial of full (or mostly full) body diffusion imaging to look for sites of metastasis. The trial is still in planning so unfortunately no link to share for that one.
[1]: http://thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(1...
[1]: http://opencv-python-tutroals.readthedocs.io/en/latest/py_tu... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_Hough_Transform
In reference to all the 'Google will kill this soon' posts. I agree there seems to be a growing list of discontinued products but their Takeout [1] service almost always lets you get your content out. While things like social interactions on G+ might hold value on the platform itself, as long as I have my notes/photos/data at the end of the day, I am happy to treat these products like I would a text editing app, just a tool to work with the data.
I think certainly there is room for it and I know there have been some recent entrants into the field which consider themselves MRI R&D. Up to this point though they are mostly bring quite secretive about what they are working on. I think though with the right funding and some smart cash behind a team that knows the space there is room to make big changes and drive price down competitively.
One example of a team in this space is Magnetica [1] who are working on smaller (physically) MRI systems for extremity imaging. (I know them through the university and my supervisor is CTO but I have no personal stake in the company otherwise)
There is 'the' MRI conference on this week in Singapore (ISMRM for those interested) which may result in some MRI related press in the coming days. Not sure where to look for it though as unfortunately the conference content is member only at this point.
Some sequences such as EPI [1] can get images very fast (200ms) with a trade off in spatial resolution. This is for things like cardiac imaging where low resolution images of the heard every 200ms are more useful than a single high resolution image. Also for moving parts of the body there is often blurring artefacts due to movement within the image window using longer sequence types.
Unfortunately I think the biggest inhibitor of MRI being more common is still the price of a scan. Here in Australia it can be a few hundred dollars for a scan (and I understand it can be far more elsewhere). Again though if we had access to a cheaper option the idea of regular scans may not be too far off.
I like to imagine a point in the future where the sci-fi full body diagnostic scanning is a reality. Still a lot of work to get there but it is certainly getting closer.
On the flip side of this things like compressed sensing and MRI fingerprinting [2] reduce further the need for a traditional 'full' scan. We are still some way off seeing these sorts of things in clinical MRI but that may be more attributable to the pace at which companies like GE and Phillips move in this space. That and the sheer cost of R&D.
Overall it is a pretty exciting time to be in MRI, despite the outside view being that it has changed very little in recent decades.
disclosure: PhD candidate in electrical engineering, focused on MRI
[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16828566 [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4376817/
I often find that posts like this are a bit too meta and in trying to write things in a general way they leave out some critical step which makes replicating their ideas difficult.