PUBH 8211 Week 2 Question Memo Example

Course	PUBH 8211 Research Methods for Public Health
Week	Week 2
Paper type	Research question memo
Length	About 620 words, 4 pages
Format	Memo, APA 7 citations
School	Walden University
Program	PhD in Public Health
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for PUBH 8211 Week 2

Memorandum

To: Dissertation Advisor

From: Doctoral Student

Date: Month Day, Year

Re: Revising the research questions for the hearing aid study

The Starting Sentence

My first draft opened with this question: "Why don't rural older adults wear their hearing aids?" I wrote it after two years as a public health nurse in the Tall Pines region, a composite rural area, where I kept meeting patients whose hearing aids sat in a drawer. The question captures the problem I care about, but it cannot guide a study. It does not say who, how many, measured how, or what kind of answer would count. This memo rewrites it through four versions until the design follows from the questions.

What this page is doingAdmitting the first question came from practice shows why it needed several rounds before it could guide research.

Version 1: Naming the Population

"Why do adults aged 65 and older fitted with hearing aids at rural audiology clinics stop wearing them?"

This adds who and where, but "why" still asks for causes the study cannot establish, and "stop" is undefined.

Version 2: Defining the Outcome

"What share of rural clinic patients over 65 who received hearing aids report wearing them less than one hour a day six months after fitting?"

This version is measurable. It uses the daily-use item from a validated outcome inventory (Cox & Alexander, 2002). But it answers only how many, not why.

Version 3: Adding Associations

"Which characteristics, such as degree of hearing loss, cost paid, distance from the clinic, and reported benefit, are associated with low daily use?"

This moves toward explanation through associations. The candidate factors come from a review that found value, fit and comfort, cost and attitudes among the main reasons for non-use (McCormack & Fortnum, 2013). But associations will not explain how people decide to stop.

Version 4: The Final Set

Quantitative question: Among older adults who received hearing aids from the three Tall Pines clinics, what proportion wear them less than an hour a day at six months, and which measured characteristics are associated with low use?

Qualitative question: In their own words, how did older adults who gave up on their hearing aids arrive at that choice?

Mixed methods question: How do participants' accounts of stopping explain, extend or contradict the associations found in the survey?

How the Questions Choose the Design

The quantitative question requires a survey of everyone fitted during a defined period. The qualitative question requires in-depth interviews with people who stopped. The mixed methods question requires that the interviews follow the survey and be shaped by its results. Together they point to an explanatory sequential design, in which a quantitative strand is followed by a qualitative strand that explains it, a design widely described in the mixed methods literature (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). I did not choose this design and then write questions to fit it; the questions, once precise, left no other sensible option.

A Check With the Clinics

Before finalizing the questions, I described them to the three clinics' audiologists. Two said the six-month point matches when they see most patients give up, which supports the timing. One suggested asking about hearing aid maintenance, which the survey will include as a candidate factor.

What I Gave Up

The final set no longer asks about adults who were never fitted, a large group, or about hearing aids bought over the counter without a clinic fitting. Both are important and both would need different sampling. I will note them as directions for future work. Narrowing the population was the hardest choice, because the clinics' staff believe the never-fitted group is where most untreated loss sits. Keeping the study to fitted patients makes it answerable within one dissertation, and it still speaks to a question the clinics can act on.

References

Cox, R. M., & Alexander, G. C. (2002). The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): Psychometric properties of the English version. International Journal of Audiology, 41(1), 30-35. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992020209101309

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

McCormack, A., & Fortnum, H. (2013). Why do people fitted with hearing aids not wear them? International Journal of Audiology, 52(5), 360-368. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2013.769066

PUBH 8211 Week 2 instructions, in plain terms

Research question assignments in doctoral methods courses ask students to develop precise questions for their study and show how those questions determine the design. Prompts often require several drafts with explanation of each revision, final questions for each strand of a mixed methods study and a statement of the design the questions imply. A memo to an advisor is a common format. Instructors reward revisions that each fix a specific problem, such as an undefined outcome or a causal word the design cannot support, final questions that are measurable or answerable, and a clear argument that the design follows from the questions rather than the other way around.

How this PUBH 8211 Week 2 example is built

The memo explains where the first question came from and why it could not guide a study. Four versions follow, each with the revised wording and a sentence on what it fixed and what it still lacked, using a validated instrument and a review of non-use reasons. The final set contains three questions. A section explains how the questions choose an explanatory sequential design. Sections then record a check with clinic audiologists and what the final questions gave up. Each version is shown in quotation marks so readers can compare wording directly. The check with audiologists shows the questions were tested against practice before being finalized.

Reading the PUBH 8211 Week 2 rubric

Graders evaluate the quality of the final questions, the clarity of each revision and the logic linking questions to design. Credit is highest when each draft shows a specific improvement. Final questions should name population, setting, measure and timing for the quantitative strand and an open process focus for the qualitative strand. A mixed methods question that states how the strands relate is expected. Acknowledging what was dropped shows judgment. Memo form and accurate citations complete the work. Graders reward revisions that remove causal words a design cannot support, such as "why" in a survey question. Questions that name a validated measure show readiness for the measurement section. A short statement of what was dropped, and why, demonstrates that narrowing was deliberate.

PUBH 8211 Week 2 help from the desk

Students often present final questions without showing how they got there. Keep your first version and write down what was wrong with it. Revise one problem at a time. Check that your quantitative outcome can be measured with a named instrument. Make your qualitative question about a process or experience. Write a mixed methods question that says how the strands connect. Send your starting question to have the four-version rewrite done with you. Read each version aloud and ask what data would answer it. Keep every version in your file so your advisor can see the path. Ask a practitioner whether the timing in your question matches what they see.

Get a PUBH 8211 Week 2 example written to your instructions

Share the question you began with, however rough, together with the Week 2 memo instructions and rubric. A memo showing each rewrite with the defect it fixes, splitting the strands and adding a joining question, arrives in 24-48h, and your first request is free. The rural region and its clinics were constructed for this memo.

More PUBH 8211 papers and PhD in Public Health samples

PUBH 8211 Week 2 questions, answered

Where can I find a free PUBH 8211 Week 2 sample paper?

Read the whole Week 2 memo above; it rewrites a question about hearing aid non-use through four versions.

Why rewrite a research question several times?

Each version fixes a specific problem, such as an undefined population or outcome, until the question can guide a design.

What are the three final questions?

A quantitative question on the proportion and correlates of low use, a qualitative question on how people decide to stop and a mixed question linking them.

Which design do the final questions require?

An explanatory sequential design, with a survey followed by interviews that explain its results.

What did the final questions give up?

Adults never fitted with hearing aids and those who bought aids over the counter without a clinic fitting.