Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for North Dakota by County

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, All Cancer Sites, All Ages
Sorted by Rate
County
sort sort alphabetically by nameascending
Annual Incidence Rate
over rate period
(95% Confidence Interval)

sort sort by ratedescending
Average Annual Count
over rate period
sort sort by countdescending
Rate Period
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
sort sort by trenddescending
North Dakota 6,10 446.5 (439.7, 453.3) 3,457 2008-2012 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.1)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1,10 453.8 (453.5, 454.1) 1,526,274 § 2008-2012 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.2)
McKenzie County 6,10 254.7 (205.6, 312.4) 19 2008-2012 stable stable trend -4.0 (-16.7, 10.8)
Dickey County 6,10 320.2 (264.8, 385.0) 26 2008-2012 stable stable trend 8.2 (-9.4, 29.2)
Divide County 6,10 330.6 (242.3, 446.0) 11 2008-2012 * *
Kidder County 6,10 336.1 (258.5, 434.4) 13 2008-2012 * *
Oliver County 6,10 338.6 (240.8, 467.6) 9 2008-2012 * *
Steele County 6,10 341.9 (248.4, 463.8) 10 2008-2012 * *
Emmons County 6,10 352.4 (290.7, 428.6) 24 2008-2012 stable stable trend -8.2 (-17.3, 1.9)
Dunn County 6,10 355.6 (282.2, 443.9) 17 2008-2012 falling falling trend -7.5 (-13.7, -0.8)
Pierce County 6,10 357.4 (294.2, 432.2) 26 2008-2012 stable stable trend -6.5 (-26.7, 19.4)
Logan County 6,10 360.6 (261.5, 489.9) 11 2008-2012 * *
LaMoure County 6,10 370.5 (305.3, 448.2) 27 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.4 (-3.9, 9.2)
Sheridan County 6,10 374.8 (256.7, 540.4) 9 2008-2012 * *
Pembina County 6,10 381.4 (329.2, 440.6) 43 2008-2012 stable stable trend 4.7 (-12.1, 24.6)
Grant County 6,10 385.4 (305.6, 486.7) 18 2008-2012 stable stable trend 3.5 (-33.1, 60.3)
Golden Valley County 6,10 403.0 (296.2, 541.5) 10 2008-2012 * *
Williams County 6,10 403.1 (368.5, 440.1) 106 2008-2012 stable stable trend -3.0 (-13.1, 8.2)
Renville County 6,10 403.5 (312.6, 515.5) 14 2008-2012 * *
Walsh County 6,10 403.7 (359.6, 452.3) 66 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.0 (-12.7, 12.4)
Wells County 6,10 405.2 (341.6, 480.6) 32 2008-2012 stable stable trend -3.4 (-15.5, 10.5)
Adams County 6,10 405.2 (318.5, 513.8) 17 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.4 (-16.7, 16.8)
Cavalier County 6,10 406.8 (336.7, 489.9) 28 2008-2012 stable stable trend 0.8 (-21.1, 28.8)
McIntosh County 6,10 424.9 (338.8, 530.9) 22 2008-2012 stable stable trend -6.6 (-25.1, 16.5)
Stark County 6,10 425.7 (392.1, 461.5) 126 2008-2012 stable stable trend 0.1 (-12.0, 14.0)
McHenry County 6,10 429.1 (368.1, 498.9) 36 2008-2012 stable stable trend -6.8 (-14.9, 1.9)
Bottineau County 6,10 430.4 (371.4, 497.3) 43 2008-2012 stable stable trend -7.1 (-22.9, 11.9)
Nelson County 6,10 436.0 (351.3, 538.1) 23 2008-2012 stable stable trend -9.1 (-32.2, 21.9)
Ramsey County 6,10 436.3 (389.1, 488.0) 67 2008-2012 stable stable trend 0.8 (-12.8, 16.4)
Burleigh County 6,10 438.9 (419.6, 458.8) 403 2008-2012 stable stable trend 3.8 (-4.0, 12.2)
Ransom County 6,10 447.0 (379.5, 524.2) 35 2008-2012 stable stable trend 5.4 (-19.6, 38.3)
Burke County 6,10 448.3 (341.0, 582.4) 14 2008-2012 * *
Richland County 6,10 456.9 (414.4, 502.8) 90 2008-2012 stable stable trend 3.2 (-20.0, 33.2)
Cass County 6,10 462.5 (446.0, 479.5) 622 2008-2012 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.2)
Grand Forks County 6,10 462.5 (437.9, 488.2) 277 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.7 (-6.1, 0.9)
Benson County 6,10 462.9 (392.4, 542.4) 32 2008-2012 stable stable trend -3.8 (-24.0, 21.7)
Stutsman County 6,10 471.0 (434.4, 510.1) 130 2008-2012 stable stable trend -0.4 (-9.6, 9.7)
Bowman County 6,10 472.9 (384.0, 578.5) 22 2008-2012 stable stable trend 4.2 (-20.9, 37.2)
Rolette County 6,10 474.1 (421.0, 531.8) 61 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.4 (-19.6, 18.6)
Traill County 6,10 475.3 (418.1, 538.8) 53 2008-2012 stable stable trend 5.0 (-2.7, 13.2)
Barnes County 6,10 479.1 (430.2, 532.5) 76 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.1 (-9.0, 5.3)
Ward County 6,10 479.7 (455.4, 505.0) 301 2008-2012 stable stable trend -4.2 (-9.1, 1.0)
Sioux County 6,10 481.1 (376.4, 605.6) 15 2008-2012 stable stable trend 4.3 (-12.8, 24.8)
Hettinger County 6,10 481.5 (378.8, 606.3) 19 2008-2012 stable stable trend 3.6 (-19.1, 32.8)
Mercer County 6,10 482.0 (424.7, 545.5) 55 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.9 (-9.1, 16.4)
Mountrail County 6,10 485.1 (419.9, 557.6) 42 2008-2012 stable stable trend -4.0 (-24.5, 21.9)
Morton County 6,10 487.9 (454.0, 523.7) 160 2008-2012 stable stable trend 4.2 (0.0, 8.5)
McLean County 6,10 515.6 (459.4, 577.7) 70 2008-2012 stable stable trend 13.4 (-6.1, 37.0)
Foster County 6,10 516.2 (425.4, 622.7) 26 2008-2012 stable stable trend 6.0 (-16.1, 33.9)
Towner County 6,10 527.4 (412.5, 668.2) 19 2008-2012 stable stable trend -9.0 (-34.2, 25.9)
Eddy County 6,10 532.1 (421.5, 666.0) 20 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.5 (-38.2, 57.0)
Griggs County 6,10 535.5 (429.2, 665.0) 22 2008-2012 stable stable trend -4.9 (-45.2, 65.0)
Sargent County 6,10 579.7 (487.7, 685.6) 31 2008-2012 stable stable trend -9.9 (-22.7, 5.1)
Billings County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Slope County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 08/02/2015 10:20 am.
Data for the United States does not include data from Nevada.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.
‡ Incidence data come 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 area for additional information.
§ The total count for the US (SEER+NPCR) may differ from the summation of the individual states reported in this table. The total uses data from the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) January 2015 data submission for the following states: California, Kentucky, Louisiana, and New Jersey but data for those states when shown individually are sourced from the SEER November 2014 submission.
* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 cases were reported in a specific area-sex-race category.

1 Source: CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission and SEER November 2014 submission.
6 Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission. State rates include rates from metropolitan areas funded by SEER.
10 Source: Incidence data provided by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR). EAPCs calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used with NPCR November 2014 data.

Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availablility, 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.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

Suppression is used to avoid misinterpretation when rates are unstable.

Return to Top