Experience
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Education
Projects
-
CBS Sports - Roku
-
Roku Recommends v2
-
MTV - Roku
-
Nick Jr - Roku
-
CuriosityStream - Roku
-
CHIVE TV - Roku
-
Comedy Central - Roku
-
GaiamTV - Roku
-
Nickelodeon - Roku
-
Anime Network - Roku
-
SXSW ON - Roku
-
FMTV - Roku
-
Roku Ad Microsite
-
Roku Recommends v1
-
Acorn TV - Samsung and iOS
-
Other similar profiles
Explore more posts
-
Suntra MedTech Solutions
Some teams treat human factors engineering as a late-stage regulatory task. Others embed it from day one. The difference shows up in: • Rework • Validation timelines • Adoption speed • Post-market risk That is not just compliance. That is strategy. Where does your organization land? A) Late-stage validation B) Integrated early Drop your letter below. https://hubs.ly/Q046C46T0 #HumanFactorsEngineering #ProductDevelopment #Innovation
-
Henri Schellingerhout
I recently reviewed five resumes for senior roles, based on two job descriptions. The technical experience was solid across the board. Different stacks, different domains, different architectures. But I wasn't looking for a 1:1 technical match. For senior roles, I'm not only interested in whether someone has used the exact same tools. I'm interested in how they think, how they position themselves, and how they carry responsibility. Do they sound certain, or reflective? Do they describe leading, or enabling others? Do they show openness to different ideas, especially from non-technical stakeholders? Because here's what I've learned: A senior who is technically strong but difficult to challenge is a risk. Not because they lack knowledge, but because they limit the thinking around them. Psychological safety becomes visible at this level. Not in how much someone knows. But in how safely others can question them. Technical alignment can be trained. Ego rarely can. And for senior roles, the latter matters more than most job descriptions admit.
2 Comments -
Yubin Park, PhD
How many LCDs get archived each month? Medicare Coverage Determinations (MCD) are a living animal. Their versions get updated every so often, and you need to be up to date to understand the currently applicable coverage rules. But do we know how much it changes every month? The MCD site has a download section, but it only allows downloading the data for the "current" versions, and older versions are only available from a web portal. So, it is difficult to track how quick versions get updated, and become obsolete. Yes, it's not easy if you are downloading only the current files. But what if you downloaded all the previously released files? I have been doing this task - don't ask me why. I have unpacked all monthly downloads, and analyzed how many versions get archived and disappear month to month. The chart shows how many versions get archived. To me, it's fascinating that approximately 200 articles/LCD documents change every month! This creates some real challenges. Healthcare organizations need to stay current with these evolving rules. Automated billing systems need frequent updates. Researchers studying coverage patterns over time need access to version history, but it's nearly impossible to get. How are you tracking all LCD versions change? How are you applying these changing rules automatically? Would it be helpful if someone nicely organized, tracked, and extracted all these information? The current CMS approach of only providing "current" versions makes longitudinal analysis nearly impossible. A service that maintains historical versions with clear change tracking, provides structured diff analysis between versions, and offers API access for automated systems could be quite valuable to the healthcare informatics community. What do you think? #HealthcareData #Medicare #LCD #HealthTech #RegulatoryCompliance
1 Comment
Explore top content on LinkedIn
Find curated posts and insights for relevant topics all in one place.
View top content