Table 2.
Relative prevalence of E. alabamensis during the course of the study (n = 164)
| Post turnout day | Percentage of E. alabamensis positive samples (number of samples examined) | 95% confidence interval of % |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 55.6 (164) | (45.3–65.8) |
| 2 | 60.0 (75) | (48.9–71.1) |
| 3 | 48.3 (29) | (30.1–66.5) |
| 4 | 57.3 (75) | (46.1–68.5) |
| 5 | 45.6 (68) | (33.8–57.4) |
| 6 | 60.0 (35) | (43.8–76.2) |
| 7 | 61.0 (100) | (51.4–70.6) |
| 8 | 84.4 (64) | (75.5–93.3) |
| 9 | 99.0 (100) | (97.0–100.0) |
| 10 | 93.1 (29) | (83.9–100.0) |
| 11 | 94.8 (134) | (91.0–98.5) |
| 12 | 93.1 (29) | (83.9–100.0) |
| 13 | 88.9 (45) | (79.7–98.1) |
| 14 | 98.9 (89) | (96.7–100.0) |
| 15 | 82.4 (74) | (73.8–91.1) |
| 16 | 88.0 (50) | (79.0–97.0) |
| 18 | 71.6 (95) | (62.5–80.6) |
| 21 | 60.0 (60) | (47.6–72.4) |