Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for California by County

Liver & Bile Duct, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Recentaapc
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of ***?
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 descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
California *** 7.6 (7.5, 7.8) N/A 3,488 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.5)
United States *** 6.6 (6.6, 6.7) N/A 27,509 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.0)
Sacramento County *** 8.5 (7.9, 9.2) 16 (6, 25) 149 falling falling trend -7.3 (-13.7, -0.6)
Orange County *** 7.0 (6.6, 7.4) 30 (22, 37) 265 stable stable trend -3.7 (-9.0, 1.9)
San Joaquin County *** 9.5 (8.6, 10.6) 6 (1, 19) 75 stable stable trend -2.1 (-7.8, 3.9)
San Francisco County *** 8.7 (7.9, 9.5) 12 (3, 25) 95 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.8)
Santa Clara County *** 7.7 (7.2, 8.3) 21 (13, 32) 166 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.8, 1.5)
Los Angeles County *** 7.9 (7.7, 8.2) 20 (13, 25) 891 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
San Diego County *** 7.6 (7.2, 8.0) 22 (15, 31) 289 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.5, 2.4)
Santa Cruz County *** 6.0 (4.9, 7.3) 39 (20, 46) 22 stable stable trend -0.3 (-3.3, 2.7)
El Dorado County *** 4.5 (3.5, 5.7) 46 (37, 47) 14 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.4)
Tuolumne County *** 6.8 (4.7, 9.8) 34 (3, 47) 7 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.0, 2.5)
Imperial County *** 9.5 (7.6, 11.8) 5 (1, 34) 17 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.5, 2.1)
Mendocino County *** 6.4 (4.6, 8.8) 37 (6, 47) 9 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.9, 2.9)
Nevada County *** 4.8 (3.6, 6.6) 44 (29, 47) 10 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.3, 2.3)
Tehama County *** 7.3 (4.9, 10.5) 25 (1, 47) 7 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.8, 3.0)
Alameda County *** 7.2 (6.6, 7.7) 27 (17, 37) 135 rising rising trend 1.1 (0.5, 1.7)
Marin County *** 5.0 (4.1, 6.1) 43 (33, 47) 22 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.2, 2.5)
San Mateo County *** 6.8 (6.1, 7.6) 33 (19, 41) 67 rising rising trend 1.7 (1.0, 2.5)
Sonoma County *** 6.9 (6.1, 7.8) 32 (16, 41) 52 rising rising trend 1.7 (0.6, 2.8)
Placer County *** 5.4 (4.5, 6.3) 42 (32, 47) 31 rising rising trend 1.9 (0.7, 3.0)
Ventura County *** 5.9 (5.2, 6.6) 41 (30, 45) 63 rising rising trend 1.9 (1.2, 2.7)
Contra Costa County *** 6.6 (6.0, 7.2) 36 (22, 41) 96 rising rising trend 2.0 (1.4, 2.7)
Fresno County *** 9.5 (8.7, 10.4) 7 (1, 18) 93 rising rising trend 2.2 (1.7, 2.7)
Napa County *** 6.7 (5.2, 8.6) 35 (8, 46) 14 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.7, 3.9)
Shasta County *** 6.4 (5.2, 7.9) 38 (14, 46) 19 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.8, 3.9)
Butte County *** 7.0 (5.7, 8.5) 31 (10, 44) 22 rising rising trend 2.4 (1.3, 3.5)
Humboldt County *** 8.7 (6.8, 10.9) 14 (1, 40) 16 rising rising trend 2.4 (0.6, 4.2)
Santa Barbara County *** 7.0 (6.0, 8.1) 29 (12, 41) 37 rising rising trend 2.4 (1.5, 3.3)
Tulare County *** 8.2 (7.1, 9.5) 17 (3, 36) 36 rising rising trend 2.5 (1.6, 3.5)
Yolo County *** 7.3 (5.8, 9.1) 24 (4, 44) 17 rising rising trend 2.5 (0.9, 4.0)
Merced County *** 9.5 (7.9, 11.4) 8 (1, 31) 24 rising rising trend 2.7 (1.5, 3.9)
Monterey County *** 7.3 (6.2, 8.5) 26 (10, 41) 35 rising rising trend 2.7 (1.6, 3.8)
San Luis Obispo County *** 6.0 (4.9, 7.2) 40 (21, 46) 25 rising rising trend 2.8 (1.7, 3.8)
Riverside County *** 7.4 (7.0, 7.9) 23 (16, 34) 207 rising rising trend 2.9 (1.2, 4.5)
San Bernardino County *** 8.8 (8.3, 9.4) 11 (4, 21) 187 rising rising trend 3.1 (2.5, 3.7)
Sutter County *** 8.7 (6.4, 11.5) 13 (1, 42) 10 rising rising trend 3.3 (1.8, 4.8)
Madera County *** 9.8 (7.8, 12.2) 4 (1, 32) 17 rising rising trend 3.5 (2.1, 4.9)
Stanislaus County *** 8.2 (7.2, 9.3) 18 (5, 35) 48 rising rising trend 3.8 (2.6, 4.9)
Kern County *** 8.6 (7.7, 9.6) 15 (3, 27) 71 rising rising trend 3.9 (3.0, 4.7)
Solano County *** 10.0 (8.8, 11.3) 3 (1, 17) 57 rising rising trend 4.2 (3.2, 5.1)
Lake County *** 9.2 (6.6, 12.6) 9 (1, 42) 10 rising rising trend 15.8 (0.6, 33.5)
Amador County *** 9.1 (6.3, 13.2) 10 (1, 45) 7
*
*
Calaveras County *** 4.3 (2.5, 7.4) 47 (19, 47) 4
*
*
Del Norte County *** 11.4 (7.1, 17.7) 1 (1, 44) 5
*
*
Kings County *** 8.1 (6.1, 10.6) 19 (1, 44) 11
*
*
San Benito County *** 7.1 (4.5, 10.6) 28 (1, 47) 5
*
*
Siskiyou County *** 4.8 (2.9, 7.8) 45 (15, 47) 4
*
*
Yuba County *** 10.9 (7.9, 14.7) 2 (1, 36) 9
*
*
Alpine County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Colusa County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Glenn County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Inyo County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lassen County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mariposa County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Modoc County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mono County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Plumas County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sierra County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trinity County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/28/2024 7:13 am.

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.

* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 records were reported in a specific area-sex-race category. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).

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