Question
Asked 23rd Jun, 2018

How to report the results of Kruskal-Wallis test?

I have used Kruskal-Wallis test to determine whether there is a significant difference in awareness level of bacteria resistance, in Non-Normally distributed data, among physicians, pharmacists, and nurses?

Most recent answer

24th Jun, 2020
Joseph Kipkorir Cheruiyot
University of Kabianga
@Liang Ma, it is possible to get a significant post hoc test even with a non SIG KW test, but it is meaningless. As a rule post hoc tests as the name implies means you only go for it after an omnibus test has shown a significant difference. Otherwise you don't.

Popular Answers (1)

24th Jun, 2018
Muayyad Ahmad
University of Jordan
The following is an example for reporting Kruskal-Wallis test:
Kruskal-Wallis Test was conducted to examine the differences on renal dysfunction according to the types of medication taken. No significant differences (Chi square = 3.71, p = .39, df = 6) were found among the five categories of participants (none, ACE inhibitors, ARB, ACE inhibitor and ARB, NSAID, and ACE inhibitor or ARB and NSAID).
18 Recommendations

All Answers (25)

23rd Jun, 2018
Olaide Bamidele Edet
University of Calabar
The test is appropriate if the assumption of independent observation is met and the outcome is ordinal, which should be stated in the report. If SPSS is used then check the test statistics table result, to find the p-value associated with Asymptotic Significance row which indicate the p-value to be interpreted. If less than 0.05 there is statistically significant difference between the outcome of the 3 independent groups (nurses, physicians and pharmacists). On the other hand If the p-value is greater than 0.05, then the finding is not statistically significant. If the p-value is less than 0.05, then a Mann-Whitney U test or a Dunn for pairwise comparisons in a post hoc manner is indicated.
2 Recommendations
24th Jun, 2018
Muayyad Ahmad
University of Jordan
The following is an example for reporting Kruskal-Wallis test:
Kruskal-Wallis Test was conducted to examine the differences on renal dysfunction according to the types of medication taken. No significant differences (Chi square = 3.71, p = .39, df = 6) were found among the five categories of participants (none, ACE inhibitors, ARB, ACE inhibitor and ARB, NSAID, and ACE inhibitor or ARB and NSAID).
18 Recommendations
24th Jun, 2018
Abdulsalam Halboup
University of Science and Technology, Yemen
Dear Olaide Bamidele Edet,,
thank you for your response. actually, I have used bonferroni correction when P values were less than 0.05.
1 Recommendation
24th Jun, 2018
Abdulsalam Halboup
University of Science and Technology, Yemen
Dear Muayyad Ahmad ,,
thank you for your response . Its very helpful
1 Recommendation
24th Jun, 2018
Louai Saloumi
Near East University
Dear Dr.Abdulsalam
Krukal Wallis test used for not normal continuous data to compare among more than two groups for you ( physicians, pharmacists and nurses), Now if the p>0.05, it means the three groups have no significant difference in "score" but if less than 0.05 we have significant difference among groups but to know this significant difference where you have to compare between:
Physician and pharmacists
Physician and nurses
pharmacists and nurses
Maybe you will find significant in more than one comparisons
Generally Mann Whitney U test used for pairwise comparison, in SPSS you can do both tests(Kruskal and Mann Whitney U) at once... I advice you to read more about bonferroni correction it is not always helpful..
Good luck
3 Recommendations
26th Jun, 2018
Abdulsalam Halboup
University of Science and Technology, Yemen
Dear Dr. Louai Saloumi,,
Thank you very much ..
1 Recommendation
21st Aug, 2018
Andem Bassey Andem
University of Calabar
I agree with Muayyad Ahmed answer on this.........
1 Recommendation
29th Nov, 2018
Alfred Machingambi
University of Johannesburg
Thank you for this post, l categorically benefited from the points raised which l subscribe to as well.
1 Recommendation
29th Nov, 2018
Tashi Dendup
Royal University of Bhutan
I found this example elsewhere:
A Kruskal-Wallis H test showed that there was a statistically significant difference in pain score between the different drug treatments, χ2(2) = 8.520, p = 0.014, with a mean rank pain score of 35.33 for Drug A, 34.83 for Drug B and 21.35 for Drug C.
After that post hoc test is required
4 Recommendations
13th Dec, 2018
Sarah Gehrmann
Bergische Universität Wuppertal
They explain a lot about the Kruskal-Wallis Test in general, so I thought it might be useful to post a link.
1 Recommendation
14th Apr, 2019
Aminu A. Ibrahim
Muhammad Abdullahi Wase Specialist Hospital Kano Nigeria
@ Tashi Dendup , please how do i obtain the mean rank? from which table ?
1 Recommendation
13th Aug, 2019
Jamie McNulty
Ulster University
I have done a Kruskal-wallis test but my output doesn't seem to have chi-square, have I done something wrong along the way?
2 Recommendations
16th Aug, 2019
Miracle Rotimi
Edge Hill University
Jamie McNulty , the chi-square value is the Kruskal-Wallis H Value in the Test statistics table. I don't think you have done anything wrong, if you can identify the Kruskal-Wallis H Value.
The SPSS version 25 doesn't display a chi-square value
3 Recommendations
21st Dec, 2019
Oghenekaro Omodior
Indiana University Bloomington
I should also that if significant differences were detected using a global test, which in this case is the Kruskal-Wallis test, you would want to conduct a posthoc test. You should apply the Conover test as posthoc test for pairwise multiple comparisons of the ranked data (i.e. use Conover test as posthoc if Kruskal-Wallis p-value < 0.05). I don't use SPSS, but in RStudio, the command line is very straightforward.
1 Recommendation
17th Jan, 2020
Karl E. Bridges
University of Auckland
I got feedback from a journal peer reviewer recently stating the following - "Please use the Kruskal-Wallis H test statistic when reporting results of that test, i.e.,
H(3)=3.514, p=.319." My understanding was the test statistic was χ2 (chi quared lovingly edited by researchgate). Who is correct?
1 Recommendation
7th Mar, 2020
Wenyan Xu
The University of Hong Kong
Hi, Karl E. Bridges , May I know that the best way to report the Kruskal-Wallis H test is like H(3)=3.514, p=.319 ?
1 Recommendation
7th Mar, 2020
Karl E. Bridges
University of Auckland
I never got an answer - this thread is very dated but I still persist with chi squared. My searches on the internet appear to recommend chi squared more so than H.
3 Recommendations
28th Apr, 2020
Olga Gyarfasova
Comenius University in Bratislava
How to visualize the Kruskal-Wallis H test? ANy ideas for graph - seven groups were pairwise tested?
3 Recommendations
28th Apr, 2020
Joanna L. Harris
University of Plymouth
Olga Gyarfasova perhaps as a heatmap similar to a correlation matrix? If you are working in R there are a few suitable plotting techniques in various packages, e.g. ggplot2 and plonly.
1 Recommendation
6th May, 2020
Chipo Mufudza
Botswana International University of Science and Technology
@olga Gyarfasova try check this link may help https://www.datanovia.com/en/lessons/kruskal-wallis-test-in-r/
1 Recommendation
7th May, 2020
Faviola Alberca
Asociación Universidad Privada San Juan Bautista
No
1 Recommendation
28th May, 2020
Joseph Kipkorir Cheruiyot
University of Kabianga
I think Chi square values are reserved for Chi square test. APA style requires that you Report Kruskal Wallis statistic, the H statistic.
1 Recommendation
Can you help by adding an answer?

Similar questions and discussions

Related Publications

Article
The problem of testing the equality of the medians of several populations is considered. Standard distribution-free procedures for this problem require that the populations have the same shape in order to maintain their nominal significance level, ever asymptotically, under the null hypothesis of equal medians , A modification of the Kruskal-Wallis...
Data
Figure S1: G1m allotypes are not associated with the disease severity in MS. The MS severity score (MSSS) was estimated for G1m3 homozygous patients (n = 50), G1m1/G1m3 heterozygous patients (n = 58), and G1m1 homozygous patients (n = 18). Bars depict mean ± SD, and differences between the three groups were tested using Kruskal–Wallis test.
Article
Thesis (M.S.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1968.
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.