The research question and objective
- Concept
Every study starts from one precise question. The objective, hypothesis, design and sample size all follow from it.
What it is
The research question turns a broad problem (for example, poor diabetes control in a town) into a concrete doubt that a study can answer. It is judged with the FINER criteria: feasible, interesting, novel, ethical and relevant. The primary question gives the general objective, the specific objectives and, in analytic studies, a hypothesis that can be tested.
Key facts
- From problem to question: problem → review of what is known → knowledge gap → question → objective → hypothesis.
- A well-written objective: a measurable verb (estimate, compare, determine), population, main variable, place and time.
- Feasibility in numbers: eligible people × proportion who agree ≥ the sample size needed, within the time available.
Worked example
- Made-up question: does a supervised walking programme lower HbA1c at 6 months in adults with type 2 diabetes at one health centre?
- Interesting, novel and relevant: diabetes is common in the area and there are no local trials. Ethical: walking is low risk and is compared with usual care.
- Sample size (difference 0.5 points, SD 1.0, α 0.05, power 80 %): 2 × 7.84 / 0.25 ≈ 63 per group, 126 in total.
- The centre sees 600 adults with diabetes; 40 % are eligible: 600 × 0.40 = 240. Half agree: 240 × 0.50 = 120, fewer than 126.
- A second centre with 400 patients is added: 400 × 0.40 × 0.50 = 80. Total: 120 + 80 = 200, more than 126.
- Hypothesis: at 6 months mean HbA1c will be 0.5 percentage points lower with walking than with usual care.
- Reading: with one centre the F (feasible) failed; with two the question meets FINER and the study can reach its sample size.
The FINER criteria applied to a question
| Criterion | What is asked | Warning sign |
|---|---|---|
| Feasible | Are there enough participants, time, money and expertise? | Eligible people do not reach the sample size |
| Interesting | Does it matter to the team and to those who will use the result? | Nobody would change practice with the answer |
| Novel | Does it confirm, refute or extend what is published? | The literature search already answered it well |
| Ethical | Would a research ethics committee approve it? | High risks, or placebo when an effective treatment exists |
| Relevant | Does it serve science, clinical care or health policy? | The result would have no use |
Markers
- FINER
- PICO
- H0
- H1
In practice
- In a thesis or residency project the committee looks at the question first: if it is vague, the whole protocol is weak.
- Before the question is fixed, a literature search checks that the knowledge gap really exists.
- Ethical approval is considered from the question itself (Resolución 8430 de 1993 in Colombia, see the Ethics page).
Common pitfalls
- Questions that are too broad (‘factors associated with diabetes’) and define no population, exposure or outcome.
- Several primary questions in one study: the sample size answers only one.
- Stating the hypothesis after looking at the data.
Test yourself
Think of the answer, then tap the question to see it.
What do the letters of FINER stand for?
Feasible, interesting, novel, ethical and relevant.
Why should a study have only one primary question?
Because the primary question sets the primary outcome and the sample size; the others are secondary or exploratory.
There are 300 eligible people, 40 % agree and the study needs 150. Is it feasible?
No: 300 × 0.40 = 120, fewer than 150. Another centre, more time or a revised question is needed.
When is the hypothesis stated?
Before the data are collected, in the protocol; stating it after seeing them makes the study exploratory.
Elsewhere in DurgiPedia
Connections
Educational content on epidemiological and statistical methods; the examples use made-up numbers to teach the calculation. Not a clinical or legal guide: current Colombian rules are in the official sources.
Sources: Chapter 2: Determining the scope of the review and the questions it will address (Cochrane, 2023); Principles of Epidemiology | Lesson 1 - Section 7 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012).
Spotted a mistake?We are always improving for the community. Tell us what is wrong and our team will review it.Report a mistake
Representative model, for educational purposes only.