TABLE 1.

Simulation study: results for individual package component effects. Unit costs were c₁ = 1 and c₂ = 8

$e^{{\mathit{\beta }}^{\star }}$	n 1j	n 2j	J	${\widehat{\beta }}_{11}$			${\widehat{\beta }}_{12}$
				%RelBias	$\frac{\text{SE}}{\text{EMP}.\text{SD}}\left(\times 100\right)$	CP95	%RelBias	$\frac{\text{SE}}{\text{EMP}.\text{SD}}\left(\times 100\right)$	CP95
Scenario 1 (J1 = J2 = J)
(1.2, 1.5)	50	100	6	−2.3	96.5	95.1	−1.9	84.1	94.0
			10	−2.7	98.8	94.9	−1.2	92.2	95.2
			20	−1.4	101.3	95.2	−0.3	102.7	95.6
		200	6	−1.8	95.0	94.9	−2.6	81.0	95.4
			10	−4.4	92.7	94.2	−1.0	91.9	95.2
			20	−2.1	102.2	95.5	−0.2	99.7	95.2
	100	100	6	−1.7	92.9	94.7	−1.5	86.2	95.5
			10	2.8	101.9	95.7	−1.4	100.9	95.4
			20	2.1	101.1	95.5	−0.5	101.6	95.0
		200	6	−3.2	91.4	94.6	−0.8	83.6	95.5
			10	−1.6	99.5	95.4	−0.6	94.9	95.3
			20	−0.4	98.4	95.0	−0.3	97.5	94.5
(1.2, 2)	50	100	6	−16.0	91.6	95.4	0.7	86.0	96.0
			10	−7.4	101.4	95.8	0.2	102.2	96.0
			20	−3.6	99.6	95.2	−0.1	101.4	94.8
		200	6	−11.8	89.9	95.1	0.7	89.7	95.1
			10	−9.2	94.9	95.5	0.1	97.6	96.0
			20	−2.7	100.0	95.0	−0.2	101.4	96.2
	100	100	6	−7.6	94.5	95.8	−0.1	94.1	95.2
			10	−2.1	98.2	94.8	−0.0	102.7	95.2
			20	−3.7	100.3	95.2	0.2	102.7	95.5
		200	6	−7.1	84.6	95.2	0.3	95.8	95.9
			10	−4.6	96.4	94.7	0.0	99.6	95.5
			20	−3.5	98.0	94.6	0.1	104.8	95.9
Scenario 2a (J1 = 6, J2 = 12)
(1.2, 1.5)	50	200		−3.8	96.4	95.5	−0.5	91.0	94.8
(1.2, 2)	50	200		−7.4	95.6	95.9	0.7	94.7	95.5
Scenario 2b (J1 = 10, J2 = 20)
(1.2, 1.5)	50	200		−3.1	96.9	94.6	−0.7	95.5	95.5
(1.2, 2)	50	200		−6.2	93.4	94.7	0.2	100.1	95.2

%RelBias, percent relative bias $100\left(\widehat{\beta }-{\beta }^{\star }\right)/{\beta }^{\star }$; SE, mean estimated standard error; EMP.SD, empirical standard deviation; CP95, empirical coverage rate of 95% confidence intervals.