1. Age distribution of tested dogs
Figure 1
Age distribution of tested dogs 45
41.7 40 35 30
Percent 25 20
15.6 15
12.5 10
9.4
6.3 5
4.2
4.2
4.2
2.1
<=1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
>8
Age (years)

2. Expected proportions of false negatives and false positives
Figure 2
Expected proportions of false negatives and false positives
6.0
4.0
5.5
3.5
5.0
3.0
ICH–specificity = 87 %
4.5
CDV & ICH-sensitivity = 95 %
2.5
Proportion of false negatives (%)
Sensitivity
Sensitivity
Proportion of false positives (%)
Specificity
4.0
2.0
3.5
1.5
3.0
1.0
2.5
0.5
CPV-sensitivity = 97 %
2.0
0.0 75 80 85 90 95
100
True prevalence of protected dogs (%)

3. Distribution of scores for the level of immunity (N = 322 dogs)
Figure 3
Distribution of scores for the level of immunity (N = 322 dogs) 60 a) 60 b) 60 c) 55 55 55
Protected 50 50 50 No 45 45 45
Yes 40 40 40 35 35 35
Percent 30 30 30 25 25 25 20 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 10 5 5 5
Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Canine Parvovirus
Canine Distemper Virus
Infectious Canine Hepatitis

4. Comparison of scores in the first and the second test (N = 74 dogs)
Figure 4
Comparison of scores in the first and the second test (N = 74 dogs) 80 a) 80 b) 80 c) 75
Tests 75 75 70 70 70
First 65 65 65 60
Second 60 60 55 55 55 50
Score<3 in 2nd test: 8.1 % 50
Score<3 in 2nd test: 6.8 % 50
Score<3 in 2nd test: 18.9 % 45 45 45
Percent 40 40 40 35 35 35 30 30 30 25 25 25 20 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 10 5 5 5
Test 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Score 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6
Canine Parvovirus
Canine Distemper Virus
Infectious Canine Hepatitis

5. Difference in scores between first and second test (2nd – 1th)
Figure 5
Difference in scores between first and second test (2nd – 1th) 60 a) 60 b) 60 c) 55 55 55
Scores 50 50 50
Lower in 2nd test 45 45 45
Unchanged 40 40 40
Higher in 2nd test 35 35 35
Percent 30 30 30 25 25 25 20 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 10 5 5 5
Diff. -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2
Canine Parvovirus
Canine Distemper Virus
Infectious Canine Hepatitis

6. Figure 6
Relationships between difference in scores between 1th and 2nd test (2nd – 1th) 4 a) 4 b) 4 c) 3 3 3 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 3 7 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 22 1 7 13 1 2 2 11 4 2
CDV Difference (2nd – 1th)
ICH Difference (2nd – 1th)
ICH Difference (2nd – 1th) 1 2 4 12 1 1 6 14 2 1 6 13 1 2 -1 -1 -1 1 3 1 2 2 2 7 1 6 3 2 1 -2 -2 -2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 -3 -3 -3 1 2 1 1 -4 -4 -4 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4
CPV Difference (2nd – 1th)
CPV Difference (2nd – 1th)
CDV Difference (2nd – 1th)

7. Predicted probability of test score < 3 as a function of age
Figure 7
Predicted probability of test score < 3 as a function of age
0.25
0.20
Maximum Likelihood Estimates
CPV: α = (p = 0.001); β = (p < 0.001)
0.15
CDV: α = (p = 0.025); β = (p < 0.001)
Predicted probability
ICH: α = (p = 0.002); β = (p < 0.001)
0.10
0.05
0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Age (years)

8. Estimated true prevalence of unprotected dogs as a function of age
Figure 8
Estimated true prevalence of unprotected dogs as a function of age 25 20
Legend
Specificity+Pr(T+)-100
p = 100 -
CPV
Sensitivity+Specificity-100 15
CDV
p = Estim. True prev. of unprotected
Pr(T+) = Prop. tested protected
Estimated true prevalence (%)
ICH 10 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Age (years)