@AICp I believe that Area51 is trying to make the point that with diagnostic tools the purpose of double-blinding is to ensure that nobody who is using one diagnostic tool knows what the result was from the other tool for the patient. It removes the possibility of anybody's judgement being influenced by knowledge of what the answer is "supposed" to be.
I tend to agree with you that it isn't relevant that the Australian studies aren't double-blinded. The purpose of the Australian studies (and the Indonesian, MSF and MGH ones too) is to gather cough data, then train and test the algorithm. Without trained algorithms there's nothing to test.
The purpose of the US trial was to prove that the trained algorithms were sufficiently accurate diagnostic tools to be used as a medical device. For that purpose a double-blinded trial is absolutely essential.
Speaking of tools...
@Area51 you really are a nasty, condescending piece of work aren't you?! I'm putting you on ignore. You don't provide enough actual information to make it worth wading through your snide, superior point-scoring.