ArticleAddiction & health2025
Research Hypothesis: A Brief History, Central Role in Scientific Inquiry, and Characteristics.
Article in Addiction & health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A well-constructed hypothesis is central to scientific knowledge, guiding the research process from a problem to its potential solution. This paper aims to provide a brief history of the scientific hypothesis, emphasize its central role in hypothesis-driven research, and outline the characteristics of a well-formulated scientific hypothesis. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of philosophical and scientific literature to examine the evolution of hypothesis formulation within the hypothetico-deductive (HD) framework, with emphasis on Karl Popper's principles of falsifiability and deduction. Findings: The HD method remains the cornerstone of scientific inquiry, with hypothesis formulation serving as a critical link between theory and empirical testing. The 5E rule, which is a framework that defines an effective research hypothesis as Explicit, Evidence-based, Ex-ante, Explanatory, and Empirically testable, ensures that hypotheses are clear, relevant, and actionable within scientific investigation. Conclusion: Despite its importance, hypothesis formulation is often underemphasized in modern biomedical research, where many struggle to construct well-defined, testable hypotheses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.