Table 5.

Comparison of apparent prevalence rates in badgers obtained by event-based surveillance and by targeted surveillance for two periods in infected area 3 [percentages are given with 95% confidence intervals (CI); in brackets number of infected/analyzed animals].

Type of surveillance component	P1 (2013–2014) Culture	P2 (2016–2017) PCR
	Apparent prevalence rates [95% CI] (No. of infected badgers/no. analyzed)
Event-based surveillance	8.2% [4.2–14.2%] (11/134)	9.6% [6.8–13.1%] (35/365)
Targeted surveillance	2.7% [1.7–4.1%] (22/805)	5.3% [4.1–6.8%] (61/1143)