Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Kansas by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 25.1?
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 No 38.1 (37.1, 39.0) N/A 1,373 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.3, -2.4)
United States No 35.0 (34.9, 35.0) N/A 142,497 falling falling trend -4.8 (-5.1, -4.6)
Rush County No 70.7 (42.7, 116.2) 1 (1, 63) 4 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.0, 2.5)
Geary County No 65.3 (50.9, 82.4) 2 (1, 32) 14 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.0)
Cherokee County No 61.2 (49.1, 75.8) 3 (1, 32) 18 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.5)
Brown County No 60.7 (43.3, 83.5) 4 (1, 51) 9
*
*
Wilson County No 57.7 (40.0, 81.6) 5 (1, 55) 7 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.9, 1.4)
Neosho County No 57.6 (44.7, 73.7) 6 (1, 45) 14 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.3)
Doniphan County No 57.5 (39.4, 82.4) 7 (1, 61) 7 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.4, 1.9)
Franklin County No 56.5 (45.6, 69.5) 8 (1, 40) 19 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.6, 1.3)
Osborne County No 55.6 (32.7, 93.7) 9 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.2, 1.8)
Crawford County No 55.5 (46.1, 66.4) 10 (1, 35) 25 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.3, 0.5)
Rooks County No 54.7 (34.6, 85.0) 11 (1, 65) 5 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.2, 3.3)
Russell County No 53.1 (34.9, 78.9) 12 (1, 64) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.0, 1.3)
Greenwood County No 52.9 (32.6, 82.8) 13 (1, 66) 5 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.4)
Barber County No 51.5 (30.9, 84.1) 14 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.2, 1.9)
Anderson County No 50.3 (34.3, 72.7) 15 (1, 64) 6 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.1, 1.5)
Osage County No 49.8 (37.8, 65.0) 16 (2, 54) 12 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Wyandotte County No 49.7 (44.8, 54.9) 17 (7, 33) 82 falling falling trend -4.1 (-5.9, -2.2)
Kingman County No 49.4 (32.3, 73.9) 18 (1, 65) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.6)
Pawnee County No 48.1 (30.5, 74.1) 19 (1, 66) 5 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.2, 0.6)
Leavenworth County No 48.0 (41.8, 54.9) 20 (6, 43) 44 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Cloud County No 47.3 (32.4, 67.9) 21 (1, 65) 7 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.0, 1.8)
Marshall County No 46.7 (31.3, 67.7) 22 (1, 65) 7 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.6, 2.1)
Bourbon County No 46.5 (34.2, 62.4) 23 (2, 60) 10 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.2)
Labette County No 46.4 (36.3, 58.9) 24 (4, 57) 15 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.9, 1.5)
Phillips County No 46.3 (27.5, 75.5) 25 (1, 66) 4
*
*
Cowley County No 45.4 (37.2, 54.9) 26 (7, 55) 22 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.8, -1.1)
Linn County No 44.1 (30.4, 63.1) 27 (2, 66) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.7)
Coffey County No 43.5 (29.0, 64.1) 28 (2, 66) 6 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.6)
Pratt County No 43.4 (29.4, 62.8) 29 (2, 66) 6 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.4)
Jefferson County No 42.8 (32.4, 55.8) 30 (5, 62) 12 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.9, -0.4)
Montgomery County No 42.6 (34.6, 52.2) 31 (10, 57) 20 falling falling trend -5.6 (-8.9, -2.2)
Sumner County No 42.1 (32.7, 53.6) 32 (8, 62) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.2)
Miami County No 41.4 (33.4, 50.9) 33 (10, 59) 19 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Harper County No 40.8 (23.7, 67.8) 34 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.5)
Clay County No 40.5 (25.8, 61.7) 35 (3, 66) 5
*
*
Saline County No 40.5 (34.3, 47.6) 36 (14, 58) 31 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Scott County No 40.4 (22.7, 69.0) 37 (1, 66) 3
*
*
Ellsworth County No 40.3 (24.4, 64.7) 38 (2, 66) 4
*
*
Shawnee County No 40.1 (36.6, 43.9) 39 (23, 51) 100 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Ford County No 40.0 (30.2, 51.9) 40 (8, 65) 12 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.1)
Wabaunsee County No 40.0 (24.9, 62.8) 41 (3, 66) 4
*
*
Ottawa County No 39.9 (23.1, 66.2) 42 (2, 66) 3
*
*
Butler County No 39.6 (33.7, 46.4) 43 (17, 58) 33 falling falling trend -16.2 (-27.4, -3.3)
Rice County No 39.4 (26.3, 57.9) 44 (4, 66) 6 rising rising trend 30.3 (7.1, 58.4)
Atchison County No 38.5 (27.6, 52.6) 45 (7, 66) 8 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.6)
Sedgwick County No 38.2 (35.9, 40.5) 46 (29, 52) 228 falling falling trend -3.1 (-3.9, -2.3)
Dickinson County No 37.6 (28.2, 49.6) 47 (11, 66) 11 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.0, 1.8)
Sherman County No 37.4 (21.7, 62.1) 48 (3, 66) 3 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.2, 2.7)
Allen County No 36.6 (25.7, 51.4) 49 (9, 66) 7 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.2)
Reno County No 36.1 (30.7, 42.2) 50 (23, 62) 34 falling falling trend -6.4 (-10.8, -1.7)
Lyon County No 35.6 (27.6, 45.2) 51 (18, 65) 14 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.2)
Pottawatomie County No 34.3 (24.9, 46.2) 52 (15, 66) 9 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.6)
Nemaha County No 34.2 (21.6, 52.2) 53 (9, 66) 5 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.0, 1.3)
Jackson County No 33.2 (22.6, 47.8) 54 (12, 66) 6 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.0)
Finney County No 32.7 (24.1, 43.2) 55 (20, 66) 10 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.2, -1.1)
Marion County No 31.4 (21.8, 45.3) 56 (17, 66) 7 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.5, 0.7)
Harvey County No 30.9 (24.5, 38.8) 57 (30, 66) 17 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.9, -0.9)
McPherson County No 30.4 (23.5, 39.0) 58 (30, 66) 14 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.5)
Barton County No 30.0 (22.7, 39.3) 59 (30, 66) 12 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.2)
Thomas County No 29.6 (16.7, 49.7) 60 (11, 66) 3 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.4, -0.8)
Riley County No 29.4 (23.2, 36.7) 61 (35, 66) 16 stable stable trend -13.6 (-25.6, 0.3)
Johnson County No 29.0 (27.2, 31.0) 62 (50, 65) 194 falling falling trend -4.4 (-5.5, -3.3)
Douglas County No 29.0 (24.6, 33.9) 63 (44, 66) 32 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.5)
Morris County No 28.9 (16.4, 51.0) 64 (10, 66) 3 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.5, 0.1)
Ellis County No 27.3 (20.0, 36.7) 65 (35, 66) 10 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.4, -0.8)
Seward County No 26.3 (16.9, 39.0) 66 (28, 66) 5 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.3, -1.1)
Chase County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chautauqua County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cheyenne County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Comanche County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Decatur County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Edwards County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Elk County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gove County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Graham County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gray County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greeley County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hamilton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Haskell County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hodgeman County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jewell County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kearny County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kiowa County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lane County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lincoln County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Logan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Meade County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mitchell County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ness County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Norton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rawlins County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Republic County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sheridan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Smith County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stafford County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stanton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stevens County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trego County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wallace County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Washington County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wichita County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Woodson County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 02/04/2023 10:59 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.

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

* 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.

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.

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