About Dr. Filipovic-Reyes
Tomás’s role at this publication is to make sure the statistics are defensible. The category of consumer calorie-tracking apps is awash in marketing-grade claims — “industry-leading accuracy,” “AI-powered precision” — that do not survive the most basic methodological scrutiny. The same apps fail to publish their test sets, refuse to share raw data, and produce vendor-funded “studies” with sample sizes that would be embarrassing in a first-year graduate biostatistics seminar. Tomás’s job is to produce the counterweight: rigorous, replicable, peer-review-grade analysis of every consumer claim this publication evaluates.
He is the named author on the statistical-methodology articles, the second signatory on Methodology v3.2, and the gating reviewer on any article that publishes a confidence interval or a comparative ranking. His authority is technical, not editorial: he can hold up publication of any piece whose statistics he cannot vouch for, and has done so three times since the publication launched.
Credentials in detail
- PhD, Biostatistics — Stanford University (2016). Dissertation: Bootstrap confidence intervals for percentage-error metrics in self-reported dietary instruments (advisor: Prof. Tibshirani).
- MSc, Mathematical Statistics — UC Berkeley (2012).
- Licenciatura en Matemática — Universidad de Buenos Aires (2010).
- Member: American Statistical Association, International Biometric Society, Society for Clinical Trials.
- ORCID: 0000-0001-9285-6473.
Pre-publication work
Four years as senior biostatistician at a clinical-trials methodology center, including two NIH-funded consumer-app validation studies (R01 dietary-assessment instruments; K23 mobile-health intervention statistical methodology). Author of nine peer-reviewed methodology papers covering bootstrap inference, replication validity, and inter-laboratory agreement coefficients.
Editorial focus
Tomás authors statistical-methodology articles (MAPE, MAE, MAD; replicability and vendor claims; database verification). He is the named statistical reviewer on every keystone review and every accuracy-ranking piece. He does not write athlete-facing or clinician-facing content; those are Annika’s and Inés’s domains.
Conflicts of interest
No financial relationships with calorie-tracking-app vendors, no equity in app makers, no advisory positions. Income from this publication and from independent academic methodology consulting unrelated to consumer apps. Has never been compensated by an app developer.
Recent work
- Best Calorie Tracker for Contest Prep 2026 · Feb 21, 2026 · (statistical reviewer)
- What's the Best Calorie Tracking App in 2026? A Methodology-Driven Review · Apr 11, 2026 · (statistical reviewer)
- Calorie Tracking Accuracy: A Methodological Framework · Oct 7, 2025
- Calorie Tracking App Database Verification: A Methodology · Jan 25, 2026
- Calorie Tracking App Replicability: Vendor Claims vs Independent Validation · Mar 21, 2026 · (statistical reviewer)
- Calorie Tracking for Athletes 2026: A Performance-Nutrition Review · Nov 21, 2025 · (statistical reviewer)
- MAPE vs MAE vs MAD: Choosing the Right Calorie Accuracy Metric · Nov 4, 2025
- Measurement-Grade vs Marketing-Grade Calorie Tracking · Oct 21, 2025 · (statistical reviewer)
- Most Accurate Calorie Tracking App 2026: Tested and Ranked · Mar 7, 2026
- Photo-AI Calorie Tracking Validation: State of Evidence · Feb 8, 2026 · (statistical reviewer)
- Validation Studies 2026: An Evidence Map for Calorie Tracking Apps · Jan 11, 2026 · (statistical reviewer)