Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Kansas by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <65

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
Kansas N/A Yes 48.1 (47.0, 49.3) N/A 1,484 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.5, -1.3)
United States N/A Yes 45.0 (44.9, 45.1) N/A 161,722 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.9)
Kingman County Rural No 155.6 (117.2, 203.7) 1 (1, 5) 14 rising rising trend 14.0 (7.5, 27.9)
Edwards County Rural No 142.4 (81.5, 232.0) 2 (1, 45) 4
*
*
Elk County Rural No 125.9 (67.4, 219.9) 3 (1, 64) 3
*
*
Russell County Rural Yes 83.8 (52.7, 127.2) 4 (2, 64) 5 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.5, 1.9)
Harper County Rural Yes 78.9 (48.7, 122.5) 5 (2, 65) 5
*
*
Rush County Rural Yes 78.7 (42.0, 141.1) 6 (1, 67) 3
*
*
Republic County Rural Yes 77.9 (44.7, 128.4) 7 (1, 67) 4
*
*
Morris County Rural Yes 77.1 (44.8, 124.9) 8 (1, 66) 4
*
*
Phillips County Rural Yes 77.0 (44.5, 125.5) 9 (2, 67) 4
*
*
Cherokee County Urban Yes 74.8 (59.2, 93.8) 10 (3, 41) 18 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.1)
Stafford County Rural Yes 73.7 (40.2, 126.1) 11 (2, 67) 4
*
*
Brown County Rural Yes 71.7 (49.2, 101.8) 12 (3, 60) 8 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.7)
Cowley County Rural Yes 68.8 (56.6, 82.9) 13 (4, 42) 25 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.7, 0.9)
Linn County Urban Yes 67.3 (47.6, 94.1) 14 (3, 62) 9 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.3, 2.1)
Ellsworth County Rural Yes 67.2 (41.3, 105.0) 15 (2, 67) 5
*
*
Franklin County Rural Yes 66.7 (53.4, 82.6) 16 (4, 50) 20 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.0, 9.2)
Allen County Rural Yes 63.8 (44.6, 88.8) 17 (3, 64) 8 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.5)
Nemaha County Rural Yes 63.2 (42.2, 91.5) 18 (3, 66) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.0, 2.4)
Geary County Urban Yes 62.3 (47.5, 79.9) 19 (5, 59) 12 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.1, 0.2)
Marshall County Rural Yes 61.3 (41.2, 88.7) 20 (4, 66) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Neosho County Rural Yes 61.3 (44.9, 82.1) 21 (4, 63) 10 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.2)
Crawford County Rural Yes 60.8 (50.1, 73.4) 22 (7, 53) 24 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Doniphan County Urban Yes 59.5 (37.7, 90.8) 23 (3, 67) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 1.2)
Greenwood County Rural Yes 59.4 (35.2, 96.6) 24 (3, 67) 5 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.0, 0.0)
Wyandotte County Urban Yes 58.9 (53.7, 64.4) 25 (13, 42) 100 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.3, -1.2)
Atchison County Rural Yes 58.2 (41.8, 79.1) 26 (5, 66) 9 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.3)
Montgomery County Rural Yes 57.7 (46.7, 70.8) 27 (8, 57) 22 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.4)
Mitchell County Rural Yes 57.3 (32.2, 95.8) 28 (3, 67) 4
*
*
Sumner County Urban Yes 57.2 (44.5, 72.7) 29 (7, 61) 16 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.2, -1.0)
Gray County Rural Yes 57.0 (31.6, 95.1) 30 (3, 67) 3
*
*
Pawnee County Rural Yes 56.9 (33.2, 93.1) 31 (3, 67) 4
*
*
Dickinson County Rural Yes 56.8 (42.9, 74.2) 32 (6, 63) 13 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.4)
Grant County Rural Yes 56.5 (34.5, 87.8) 33 (4, 67) 4 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.8, 0.9)
Lyon County Rural Yes 55.7 (43.8, 69.9) 34 (9, 61) 17 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Wilson County Rural Yes 55.7 (35.5, 84.4) 35 (4, 67) 5 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.5, 0.3)
Seward County Rural Yes 54.8 (40.7, 72.2) 36 (7, 64) 10 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.1)
Reno County Rural Yes 54.1 (46.1, 63.2) 37 (15, 56) 36 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Harvey County Urban Yes 53.3 (42.4, 66.2) 38 (11, 62) 19 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.0, -0.1)
Barton County Rural Yes 53.1 (40.9, 67.9) 39 (10, 63) 15 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.3)
Bourbon County Rural Yes 52.9 (36.4, 74.7) 40 (6, 67) 7 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.2, 0.0)
Sedgwick County Urban Yes 52.5 (49.7, 55.4) 41 (25, 48) 281 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.0)
Shawnee County Urban Yes 52.5 (47.8, 57.5) 42 (22, 52) 102 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Anderson County Rural Yes 51.3 (30.8, 81.3) 43 (4, 67) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.6, 0.3)
Clay County Rural Yes 50.8 (32.1, 78.1) 44 (5, 67) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.8, 1.0)
Cloud County Rural Yes 49.9 (30.1, 78.4) 45 (5, 67) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.5, 2.4)
Rice County Rural Yes 48.8 (29.6, 76.3) 46 (6, 67) 5
*
*
Saline County Rural Yes 47.7 (39.8, 56.8) 47 (21, 63) 29 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Labette County Rural Yes 47.5 (35.0, 63.3) 48 (13, 67) 11 falling falling trend -10.4 (-28.5, -2.1)
Leavenworth County Urban Yes 47.1 (40.9, 54.1) 49 (26, 62) 43 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Jefferson County Urban Yes 45.8 (32.9, 62.4) 50 (14, 67) 10 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.4, -0.5)
Jackson County Urban Yes 45.7 (31.7, 64.6) 51 (11, 67) 7 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.7, -0.1)
Ellis County Rural Yes 44.6 (33.5, 58.4) 52 (17, 67) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.1)
McPherson County Rural Yes 44.6 (34.5, 56.9) 53 (20, 67) 15 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
Osage County Urban Yes 44.4 (30.6, 62.8) 54 (12, 67) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.7, 0.1)
Wabaunsee County Urban Yes 44.2 (27.1, 70.8) 55 (8, 67) 5
*
*
Finney County Rural Yes 43.5 (34.1, 54.8) 56 (22, 67) 15 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.5, -1.4)
Pottawatomie County Urban Yes 43.4 (32.2, 57.3) 57 (17, 67) 11 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.6, -0.1)
Miami County Urban Yes 43.4 (34.5, 54.2) 58 (25, 67) 18 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.5)
Butler County Urban Yes 43.2 (36.6, 50.7) 59 (33, 66) 33 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Pratt County Rural Yes 41.0 (23.6, 66.8) 60 (9, 67) 4
*
*
Coffey County Rural Yes 39.3 (24.2, 62.6) 61 (14, 67) 5
*
*
Riley County Urban Yes 38.7 (30.9, 47.7) 62 (37, 67) 18 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.8)
Ford County Rural Yes 38.6 (29.6, 49.4) 63 (32, 67) 13 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -1.0)
Marion County Rural Yes 36.2 (23.5, 54.8) 64 (24, 67) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.1, 0.4)
Douglas County Urban Yes 35.0 (30.0, 40.6) 65 (51, 67) 37 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -0.9)
Johnson County Urban Yes 34.0 (32.0, 36.1) 66 (57, 67) 218 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.2, -1.7)
Thomas County Rural Yes 33.3 (18.4, 57.0) 67 (20, 67) 3
*
*
Barber County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chase County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chautauqua County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cheyenne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Comanche County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Decatur County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gove County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Graham County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greeley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hamilton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Haskell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hodgeman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jewell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kearny County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kiowa County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lane County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lincoln County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Logan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Meade County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ness County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Norton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Osborne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ottawa County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rawlins County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rooks County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scott County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sheridan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sherman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Smith County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stanton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stevens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trego County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wallace County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Washington County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wichita County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Woodson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/04/2024 4:49 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