Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Oregon by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Count
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate descending
CI*Rank ⋔
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by CI rank descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Oregon N/A No 149.2 (147.7, 150.6) N/A 8,321 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.5, -1.3)
United States N/A No 146.0 (145.8, 146.2) N/A 602,955 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.6, -1.4)
Multnomah County Urban No 146.5 (142.9, 150.3) 25 (18, 29) 1,257 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.3, -1.7)
Lane County Urban No 154.9 (150.1, 159.8) 19 (12, 25) 840 falling falling trend -1.3 (-3.0, -1.1)
Washington County Urban No 126.5 (122.6, 130.6) 32 (28, 35) 808 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.7, -1.4)
Clackamas County Urban No 139.0 (134.7, 143.5) 29 (23, 32) 800 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.4, -1.5)
Marion County Urban No 153.0 (147.6, 158.5) 20 (13, 26) 629 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -1.2)
Jackson County Urban No 149.3 (143.5, 155.4) 22 (15, 29) 524 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.4, -1.0)
Douglas County Rural No 179.5 (170.8, 188.5) 4 (1, 13) 359 falling falling trend -0.7 (-0.9, -0.4)
Deschutes County Urban Yes 121.7 (115.8, 127.8) 34 (29, 35) 341 falling falling trend -2.9 (-7.5, -1.8)
Linn County Urban No 180.3 (171.3, 189.7) 1 (1, 13) 315 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.3)
Josephine County Urban No 179.4 (169.8, 189.5) 5 (1, 13) 291 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.5)
Coos County Rural No 178.9 (167.6, 190.8) 6 (1, 14) 212 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.8)
Yamhill County Urban No 143.2 (134.4, 152.5) 28 (16, 31) 204 falling falling trend -1.9 (-6.0, -1.1)
Klamath County Rural No 180.0 (168.2, 192.5) 2 (1, 14) 186 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.3)
Polk County Urban No 146.2 (136.3, 156.7) 27 (14, 31) 168 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.0, -0.3)
Lincoln County Rural No 169.9 (157.3, 183.4) 10 (1, 21) 163 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.6)
Umatilla County Rural No 155.5 (144.3, 167.4) 17 (8, 29) 147 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.5)
Benton County Urban No 124.0 (114.8, 133.7) 33 (28, 35) 143 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.6)
Columbia County Urban No 167.6 (154.5, 181.6) 11 (1, 23) 128 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -0.9)
Clatsop County Rural No 165.3 (150.9, 181.0) 12 (1, 26) 106 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Curry County Rural No 179.6 (162.7, 198.6) 3 (1, 19) 98 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.2)
Tillamook County Rural No 176.7 (159.6, 195.5) 7 (1, 21) 88 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Wasco County Rural No 160.9 (143.1, 180.5) 14 (1, 30) 64 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Crook County Urban No 146.3 (129.7, 164.9) 26 (9, 33) 62 falling falling trend -5.7 (-11.1, -2.9)
Malheur County Rural No 158.2 (140.8, 177.3) 15 (2, 30) 62 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.5, 6.8)
Union County Rural No 155.5 (137.7, 175.1) 18 (2, 31) 60 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.5)
Jefferson County Urban No 162.6 (142.7, 184.6) 13 (1, 30) 53 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.6, 0.5)
Baker County Rural No 171.6 (149.6, 196.4) 9 (1, 28) 50 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Hood River County Rural No 127.7 (110.1, 147.5) 31 (19, 35) 39 falling falling trend -4.3 (-11.0, -1.6)
Grant County Rural No 172.6 (141.7, 210.3) 8 (1, 31) 26 stable stable trend 7.5 (-1.8, 21.5)
Morrow County Rural No 157.2 (128.9, 190.2) 16 (1, 34) 23 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.7, 0.1)
Wallowa County Rural No 151.3 (122.5, 186.8) 21 (1, 35) 22 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.3)
Lake County Rural No 147.9 (120.2, 181.4) 23 (1, 35) 21 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.7)
Harney County Rural No 147.2 (119.0, 181.8) 24 (1, 35) 20 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.2)
Sherman County Rural No 137.5 (86.0, 217.0) 30 (1, 36) 5 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.0, -0.6)
Wheeler County Rural Yes 112.8 (70.6, 199.0) 35 (1, 36) 4 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.5, 0.4)
Gilliam County Rural Yes 72.7 (42.1, 131.0) 36 (31, 36) 3 falling falling trend -5.1 (-18.2, -2.4)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 09/20/2024 8:00 pm.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
Trend
Rising when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is above 0.
Stable when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change includes 0.
Falling when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is below 0.

† Death data provided by the National Vital Statistics System public use data file. Death rates calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Death rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). The Healthy People 2030 goals are based on rates adjusted using different methods but the differences should be minimal. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI.
The US Population Data File is used with mortality data.
‡ The Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) is based on the APCs calculated by Joinpoint. Due to data availability issues, the time period used in the calculation of the joinpoint regression model may differ for selected counties.

⋔ Results presented with the CI*Rank statistics help show the usefulness of ranks. For example, ranks for relatively rare diseases or less populated areas may be essentially meaningless because of their large variability, but ranks for more common diseases in densely populated regions can be very useful. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

Healthy People 2030 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.


Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

When displaying county information, the CI*Rank for the state is not shown because it's not comparable. To see the state CI*Rank please view the statistics at the US By State level.

Return to Top