For the 1407 dogs who were clear of SRB in February, they changed from being 100% clear to being 90.1% clear, with 1 in 10 of these dogs developing SRB they didn’t have previously. However, because of the dramatic improvement seen in the dogs that had SRB before the pandemic, the overall prevalence of SRB in the population decreased from 22% in February, to 17.2% in October (reported in the paragraph above). The numbers have been clarified in this section to help future readers, and additional discussion has been added around the overall decrease in SRB prevalence in both the abstract and in the discussion (lines 524-544).
L278-280 “There were 1,407 dogs who were clear of SRB at baseline in February 2020. When looking at SRB status in October, of 1,187 dogs who were left alone in October, 117 (9.9%) were reported to have shown at least one SRB”. In other words, 1407/1807 (78%) of dogs were clear of SRB in February and 90.1% in October. This is good news, and it is unclear for me why is it reported as bad news. The next section (l281-283) emphasizes that 55.7% of the dogs who were reported to show SRB in February were clear in October. This is a big improvement, I think.