Table 3.

Comparing trial properties of our JBHM with Simon’s designs. JBHM had the U(0, 10) prior for σ.

Scenario	Stratum	Hypothesis	Design	Type I	Power	n	En	PET
I	A	0.1 vs. 0.3	Optimal	0.05	0.78	28	15	0.73
			Minimax			21	15	0.66
			JBHM			20	13	0.75
	B	0.5 vs. 0.75	Optimal	0.1	0.86	23	15	0.62
			Minimax			21	16	0.5
			JBHM			20	14	0.62
II	A	0.1 vs. 0.3	Optimal	0.05	0.77	30	14	0.77
			Minimax			21	15	0.66
			JBHM			20	13	0.75
	B	0.5 vs. 0.7	Optimal	0.11	0.74	29	16	0.64
			Minimax			23	16	0.5
			JBHM			20	16	0.35
III	A	0.1 vs. 0.25	Optimal	0.05	0.66	28	16	0.7
			Minimax			26	22	0.48
			JBHM			20	13	0.70
	B	0.5 vs. 0.7	Optimal	0.11	0.73	29	16	0.64
			Minimax			22	18	0.83
			JBHM			20	15	0.50
IV	A	0.1 vs. 0.25	Optimal	0.05	0.69	37	17	0.74
			Minimax			27	21	0.51
			JBHM			20	13	0.71
	B	0.5 vs. 0.75	Optimal	0.1	0.86	23	15	0.62
			Minimax			21	16	0.5
			JBHM			20	14	0.63

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