RMP.2:4.2 - Test the Evidence-Sufficient Stop

Compare the qualified current evidence with the ResearchQuestionBrief’s answer condition. Use the condition concerning what the evidence must establish, not a condition that permits work to end with uncertainty or refusal:

• Does it answer the bounded question for the named receiver and use?
• Does its applicability cover the phenomenon, unit, case, population, corpus, contrast, and horizon?
• Does it address the principal live rival or validity threat rather than merely agree with the favored answer?
• Are its source, evidence-use, provenance, uncertainty, and currentness limits compatible with the reliance proposed?

If the evidence meets the answer condition, return the answer with the source and limits needed for its use. This is EvidenceSufficientStop; the existing answer may already be the complete result. Finish before constructing unused design comparisons or a separate justification for omitting a study. For a later receiving use, retain any uncertainty, scope limit or reason that can change that receiver’s reliance.

If the evidence is insufficient, ask what a new obtainable study could change and whether that contribution warrants its complete burden under the supplied constraints. Count preparation, access, measurement, execution, interpretation, participants, delay and displaced Work, including joint resource limits. Research worth includes a defensible contribution to knowledge and later inquiry; it is not confined to an immediate operating or commercial decision.

When supplied facts already justify selecting no new study for the current allocation question, return QualifiedNoNewStudy under §4.7 with the bounded answer or unresolved claim. Otherwise continue with the inputs and real options that can change the remaining selection. Budget, priority, availability and burden can bear on that allocation answer; they cannot turn insufficient evidence into sufficient evidence.