30c to 8c because of noisy hospital and poor protocol, page-32

"term clinical trial or study is used interchangeably even management refer to US as a study" - yes, in my view they've been a bit sloppy in the past about how they use the terms. To clarify; a "trial" is a specific type of "study" designed to test a hypothesis. So it's valid to refer to a trial as a study in the same way as you can refer to a swamp gum as a tree. Resapp themselves have occasionally referred to their algorithm training studies as trials, which I find rather misleading.

"Resapp have been running "clinical trials" in Aus since earlier this year" - agreed. My turn to use sloppy language. I should have said "completed" rather than "conducted". But as @dominic824 was referring to results in his post, there's no possibility that he was referring to the current trials.

"So the study was not used to test the algorithm?" - Not in the sense of a clinically acceptable test. Cross validation is a reasonably rigorous test from a computer-science or statistical perspective, but the methodology doesn't qualify as a clinically valid test.