Table 2.

Comparing trial properties of our JBHM with Simon’s designs. JBHM had the U(0, 1) prior for σ.

Scenario	Stratum	Hypothesis	Design	Type I	Power	n	En	PET
I	A	0.1 vs. 0.3	Optimal	0.04	0.83	33	18	0.7
			Minimax			26	20	0.55
			JBHM			20	12	0.85
	B	0.5 vs. 0.75	Optimal	0.08	0.9	31	19	0.61
			Minimax			26	22	0.81
			JBHM			20	13	0.73
II	A	0.1 vs. 0.3	Optimal	0.04	0.79	27	16	0.7
			Minimax			28	18	0.62
			JBHM			20	11	0.86
	B	0.5 vs. 0.7	Optimal	0.1	0.82	32	21	0.6
			Minimax			30	22	0.5
			JBHM			20	14	0.58
III	A	0.1 vs. 0.25	Optimal	0.05	0.73	36	20	0.79
			Minimax			33	23	0.55
			JBHM			20	13	0.73
	B	0.5 vs. 0.7	Optimal	0.1	0.8	32	20	0.61
			Minimax			28	22	0.5
			JBHM			20	14	0.58
IV	A	0.1 vs. 0.25	Optimal	0.05	0.78	44	23	0.76
			Minimax			34	29	0.54
			JBHM			20	13	0.73
	B	0.5 vs. 0.75	Optimal	0.07	0.87	29	18	0.71
			Minimax			26	21	0.87
			JBHM			20	13	0.73

En: expected sample size; PET: probability of early stopping; JBHM: Joint Bayesian hierarchical model.