[Durgical](https://durgical.com/en/) › [DurgiPedia](https://durgical.com/en/durgipedia/) › [Epidemiology](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/) › [Research methods](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/areas/research/) › The research question and objective

# The research question and objective

- Concept

Every study starts from one precise question. The objective, hypothesis, design and sample size all follow from it.

Updated Nov 13, 2026

## Key points

- FINER: feasible (participants, time, money, expertise), interesting, novel, ethical and relevant.
- One primary question sets the primary outcome and the sample size; secondary questions are supportive or exploratory.
- The hypothesis is stated before data are collected; the null hypothesis (H0) is the one that is tested.
- Descriptive studies may have objectives only; analytic and experimental studies need a hypothesis.
- Intervention questions are framed with PICO: population, intervention, comparison and outcome.

On this page

- The basics Key points
- What it is
- Key facts
- Worked example
- The FINER criteria applied to a question
- Markers
- In practice
- Common pitfalls
- Memory aid
- Elsewhere in DurgiPedia

- Study Test yourself

- Connections Connections

## 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.

## Memory aid

‘No question, no compass’: FINER checks that the question can be done (F), is worth doing (I, N, R) and is right to do (E).

## 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.

[Add to my cards (4)](https://durgical.app/estudiar/?add=/en/epidemiology/the-research-question-and-objective/)

## Elsewhere in DurgiPedia

- [Resolution 8430 of 1993: health research in Colombia and its risk categories](https://durgical.com/en/medical-ethics/resolution-8430-of-1993-health-research-in-colombia-and-its-risk-categories/)

## Connections

## Related 6

- [PICO question](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/pico-question/)
- [Literature search](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/literature-search/)
- [The research protocol](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/the-research-protocol/)
- [Hypothesis testing](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/hypothesis-testing/)
- [Sample size](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/sample-size/)
- [Study designs: how to tell them apart](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/study-designs-how-to-tell-them-apart/)

[← All of epidemiology](https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/)

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](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-02) (Cochrane, 2023); [Principles of Epidemiology | Lesson 1 - Section 7](https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/section7.html) (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.

---
Source: https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/the-research-question-and-objective/
License: CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Cite as: DurgiPedia (durgical.com), https://durgical.com/en/epidemiology/the-research-question-and-objective/