Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Idaho by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

Sorted by Rate

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 ascending
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
Idaho N/A Yes 121.0 (118.1, 123.9) N/A 1,401 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.9, -1.0)
United States N/A No 126.4 (126.2, 126.6) N/A 285,526 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.4, -1.1)
Lincoln County Rural No 183.6 (116.0, 276.5) 1 (1, 36) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.1, 2.4)
Clearwater County Rural No 147.8 (112.0, 196.7) 2 (1, 35) 13 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.3)
Payette County Rural No 146.0 (121.3, 174.6) 3 (1, 29) 26 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Custer County Rural No 144.7 (96.2, 220.5) 4 (1, 38) 6
*
*
Jerome County Urban No 143.3 (114.4, 177.4) 5 (1, 34) 18 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Washington County Rural No 139.8 (106.9, 182.1) 6 (1, 36) 13 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.5)
Idaho County Rural No 138.3 (111.7, 171.3) 7 (1, 34) 21 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.5)
Boundary County Rural No 136.7 (104.7, 177.0) 8 (1, 36) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.5)
Benewah County Rural No 134.6 (98.8, 181.7) 9 (1, 37) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.8, -0.6)
Adams County Rural No 134.6 (86.6, 209.6) 10 (1, 39) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.9, 1.5)
Bannock County Urban No 132.6 (118.4, 148.1) 11 (3, 29) 66 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Nez Perce County Urban No 129.6 (112.3, 149.1) 12 (2, 33) 44 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.2)
Kootenai County Urban No 128.9 (120.0, 138.3) 13 (5, 27) 164 falling falling trend -6.6 (-10.2, -1.7)
Canyon County Urban No 127.1 (118.4, 136.2) 14 (6, 27) 166 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Bingham County Rural No 126.7 (107.8, 148.1) 15 (3, 34) 34 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.3)
Gem County Urban No 126.3 (101.3, 156.5) 16 (2, 36) 19 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Shoshone County Rural No 125.9 (95.6, 164.1) 17 (1, 37) 14 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.3)
Owyhee County Urban No 125.6 (90.9, 170.0) 18 (1, 38) 9 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.4, 1.9)
Power County Rural No 125.5 (82.8, 183.3) 19 (1, 39) 6
*
*
Latah County Rural No 124.4 (103.6, 148.4) 20 (2, 36) 26 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.2)
Fremont County Rural Yes 120.3 (88.6, 160.4) 21 (1, 38) 10 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.2, 2.1)
Elmore County Rural Yes 120.2 (96.7, 148.0) 22 (2, 37) 19 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.7)
Teton County Rural Yes 118.6 (78.1, 172.0) 23 (1, 39) 6
*
*
Ada County Urban Yes 117.6 (112.1, 123.3) 24 (14, 32) 357 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.7)
Lemhi County Rural Yes 117.3 (84.3, 163.9) 25 (1, 39) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.6)
Twin Falls County Urban Yes 116.6 (104.3, 130.1) 26 (9, 35) 69 falling falling trend -2.5 (-6.3, -1.3)
Bonneville County Urban Yes 114.9 (103.7, 127.1) 27 (11, 35) 78 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.1)
Valley County Rural Yes 114.1 (83.2, 154.8) 28 (2, 39) 10 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.7)
Bonner County Rural Yes 113.6 (99.0, 130.2) 29 (9, 37) 48 falling falling trend -9.1 (-17.0, -2.4)
Minidoka County Rural Yes 112.4 (87.5, 142.5) 30 (4, 38) 15 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.6)
Jefferson County Urban Yes 111.0 (87.6, 138.7) 31 (4, 38) 16 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 1.0)
Cassia County Rural Yes 110.2 (86.3, 138.7) 32 (4, 38) 15 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 0.2)
Bear Lake County Rural Yes 109.4 (69.5, 166.6) 33 (1, 39) 5 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.5)
Franklin County Urban Yes 106.3 (76.2, 144.7) 34 (3, 39) 8 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.5)
Gooding County Rural Yes 104.7 (79.0, 137.2) 35 (5, 39) 11 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.3)
Caribou County Rural Yes 98.0 (62.6, 148.7) 36 (2, 39) 5
*
*
Boise County Urban Yes 90.6 (59.6, 137.2) 37 (5, 39) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.2, 1.3)
Madison County Rural Yes 81.4 (60.2, 107.3) 38 (23, 39) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.8, -0.4)
Blaine County Rural Yes 68.7 (52.3, 89.3) 39 (34, 39) 13 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.2, -1.9)
Butte County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Camas County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lewis County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oneida County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/13/2024 2:47 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.


Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.

* 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