Death Rates Table
Death Rate Report for Michigan by County
All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022
White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages
Sorted by Recentaapc
County
|
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
|
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7? |
Age-Adjusted Death Rate † deaths per 100,000 (95% Confidence Interval)
|
CI*Rank ⋔ (95% Confidence Interval)
|
Average Annual Count
|
Recent Trend |
Recent 5-Year Trend ‡ in Death Rates (95% Confidence Interval) 
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michigan | N/A | No | 158.4 (157.3, 159.5) | N/A | 17,719 |
falling 
|
-1.1 (-1.6, -1.0) |
| United States 6 | N/A | No | 151.3 (151.1, 151.5) | N/A | 463,400 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.5, -1.1) |
| Kalkaska County | Urban | No | 227.1 (199.7, 257.6) | 1 (1, 20) | 55 |
stable 
|
7.8 (-0.8, 14.4) |
| Iosco County | Rural | No | 200.3 (181.0, 221.6) | 5 (1, 36) | 96 |
stable
|
5.2 (-1.1, 12.3) |
| Midland County | Urban | No | 152.1 (142.0, 162.9) | 66 (33, 80) | 178 |
rising 
|
2.3 (0.6, 5.9) |
| Roscommon County | Rural | No | 186.8 (167.9, 208.1) | 14 (1, 59) | 90 |
stable
|
-0.1 (-0.7, 0.5) |
| Schoolcraft County | Rural | No | 189.4 (157.8, 228.0) | 12 (1, 78) | 28 |
stable
|
-0.1 (-0.7, 0.6) |
| Oscoda County | Rural | No | 194.7 (162.8, 233.0) | 8 (1, 77) | 30 |
stable
|
-0.3 (-1.4, 0.8) |
| Baraga County | Rural | No | 196.3 (160.5, 240.1) | 7 (1, 77) | 23 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-1.2, 0.4) |
| Chippewa County | Rural | No | 183.0 (164.7, 203.2) | 16 (2, 65) | 79 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-0.9, 0.1) |
| Gratiot County | Rural | No | 179.1 (162.7, 196.9) | 24 (3, 67) | 92 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-0.9, 0.2) |
| Hillsdale County | Rural | No | 188.5 (173.5, 204.7) | 13 (2, 47) | 124 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-0.9, 0.0) |
| Montmorency County | Rural | No | 211.8 (179.4, 250.2) | 2 (1, 49) | 39 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-1.3, 0.5) |
| Crawford County | Rural | No | 196.7 (171.6, 225.6) | 6 (1, 59) | 49 |
stable
|
-0.5 (-1.1, 0.0) |
| Mecosta County | Rural | No | 182.7 (166.2, 200.7) | 17 (3, 61) | 98 |
stable
|
-0.5 (-0.9, 0.0) |
| Wexford County | Rural | No | 165.5 (148.9, 183.6) | 42 (9, 78) | 79 |
stable
|
-0.5 (-1.1, 0.1) |
| Alcona County | Rural | No | 182.4 (157.3, 213.0) | 18 (1, 75) | 44 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-1.1, -0.1) |
| Calhoun County | Urban | No | 185.4 (175.7, 195.6) | 15 (4, 36) | 288 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-0.8, -0.3) |
| Clare County | Rural | No | 207.2 (188.8, 227.3) | 3 (1, 25) | 104 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-1.0, -0.2) |
| Isabella County | Rural | No | 179.9 (164.4, 196.5) | 22 (4, 62) | 105 |
stable
|
-0.6 (-1.2, 0.1) |
| Lenawee County | Rural | No | 160.6 (150.7, 171.0) | 55 (22, 74) | 210 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-0.9, -0.3) |
| Mason County | Rural | No | 179.3 (161.5, 198.9) | 23 (3, 68) | 84 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-1.2, -0.1) |
| Menominee County | Rural | No | 160.1 (142.8, 179.5) | 56 (12, 80) | 67 |
stable
|
-0.6 (-1.2, 0.0) |
| Missaukee County | Rural | No | 165.4 (141.6, 192.6) | 43 (4, 82) | 37 |
stable
|
-0.6 (-1.3, 0.2) |
| Tuscola County | Rural | No | 174.4 (161.1, 188.6) | 30 (7, 65) | 137 |
falling
|
-0.6 (-1.1, -0.2) |
| Alpena County | Rural | No | 180.2 (163.1, 199.0) | 21 (3, 67) | 89 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.2, -0.3) |
| Branch County | Rural | No | 164.0 (149.3, 179.9) | 45 (12, 76) | 97 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.2, -0.2) |
| Eaton County | Urban | No | 156.7 (147.3, 166.7) | 60 (28, 75) | 219 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.0, -0.4) |
| Emmet County | Rural | No | 152.6 (137.5, 169.2) | 65 (19, 82) | 82 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.2, -0.2) |
| Gladwin County | Rural | No | 190.1 (171.2, 211.0) | 11 (1, 54) | 86 |
stable
|
-0.7 (-1.3, 0.0) |
| Huron County | Rural | No | 162.6 (147.4, 179.4) | 49 (13, 78) | 92 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.1, -0.3) |
| Ingham County | Urban | No | 161.0 (153.8, 168.5) | 53 (28, 70) | 394 |
stable
|
-0.7 (-1.1, 0.3) |
| Muskegon County | Urban | No | 175.7 (167.4, 184.5) | 27 (11, 50) | 352 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-0.9, -0.4) |
| Oceana County | Rural | No | 158.2 (140.1, 178.4) | 59 (9, 81) | 61 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.3, -0.1) |
| Osceola County | Rural | No | 177.6 (157.6, 199.8) | 26 (3, 72) | 61 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.2, -0.2) |
| Sanilac County | Rural | No | 180.8 (165.4, 197.4) | 20 (4, 64) | 113 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.1, -0.2) |
| Van Buren County | Rural | No | 163.7 (151.8, 176.3) | 46 (16, 73) | 154 |
falling
|
-0.7 (-1.1, -0.2) |
| Alger County | Rural | No | 150.5 (121.5, 186.4) | 70 (5, 83) | 21 |
stable
|
-0.8 (-1.7, 0.1) |
| Allegan County | Rural | No | 163.5 (154.0, 173.4) | 47 (20, 70) | 237 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.1, -0.5) |
| Bay County | Urban | No | 171.9 (162.3, 182.0) | 32 (13, 60) | 258 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.0, -0.6) |
| Cass County | Urban | No | 170.1 (156.6, 184.7) | 33 (9, 71) | 125 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.2, -0.4) |
| Houghton County | Rural | No | 175.4 (158.1, 194.3) | 28 (4, 70) | 80 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.2, -0.4) |
| Jackson County | Urban | No | 169.8 (161.7, 178.3) | 34 (16, 61) | 346 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.1, -0.5) |
| Luce County | Rural | No | 207.1 (164.8, 259.8) | 4 (1, 78) | 19 |
stable
|
-0.8 (-1.9, 0.3) |
| Marquette County | Rural | No | 153.5 (141.9, 165.9) | 63 (28, 79) | 139 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.2, -0.3) |
| Ontonagon County | Rural | No | 151.9 (124.8, 189.8) | 67 (7, 83) | 23 |
stable
|
-0.8 (-1.8, 0.1) |
| Shiawassee County | Rural | No | 165.1 (153.3, 177.7) | 44 (14, 73) | 153 |
falling
|
-0.8 (-1.2, -0.5) |
| Arenac County | Rural | No | 178.6 (154.1, 206.7) | 25 (1, 77) | 45 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.5, -0.2) |
| Berrien County | Urban | No | 161.2 (153.1, 169.6) | 52 (26, 71) | 321 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.2, -0.6) |
| Charlevoix County | Rural | No | 160.8 (143.4, 180.1) | 54 (11, 80) | 70 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.5, -0.3) |
| Cheboygan County | Rural | No | 162.4 (145.2, 181.6) | 50 (10, 80) | 75 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.5, -0.3) |
| Delta County | Rural | No | 167.1 (152.3, 183.2) | 37 (9, 75) | 105 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.3, -0.5) |
| Ionia County | Urban | No | 166.5 (153.1, 180.8) | 38 (11, 73) | 120 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.3, -0.5) |
| Lapeer County | Urban | No | 166.4 (155.9, 177.5) | 40 (15, 69) | 201 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.3, -0.5) |
| Montcalm County | Urban | No | 180.9 (168.0, 194.5) | 19 (5, 53) | 154 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.3, -0.5) |
| Newaygo County | Rural | No | 165.5 (151.6, 180.5) | 41 (12, 74) | 114 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.4, -0.4) |
| Otsego County | Rural | No | 159.4 (141.2, 179.7) | 57 (11, 81) | 60 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.4, -0.3) |
| Ottawa County | Urban | No | 136.9 (131.2, 142.8) | 78 (70, 82) | 446 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.1, -0.6) |
| Kalamazoo County | Urban | No | 154.0 (147.3, 161.0) | 62 (44, 75) | 412 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.8) |
| Kent County | Urban | No | 150.6 (146.2, 155.1) | 69 (56, 75) | 931 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.1, -0.9) |
| Macomb County | Urban | No | 162.3 (158.8, 165.9) | 51 (35, 62) | 1,687 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.1, -0.9) |
| Manistee County | Rural | No | 173.7 (155.6, 193.8) | 31 (4, 72) | 77 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.5, -0.6) |
| Monroe County | Urban | No | 166.4 (158.4, 174.7) | 39 (19, 64) | 344 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.8) |
| Ogemaw County | Rural | No | 191.3 (170.5, 214.5) | 10 (1, 56) | 71 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.6, -0.4) |
| St. Clair County | Urban | No | 169.5 (161.7, 177.7) | 35 (16, 60) | 373 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.8) |
| St. Joseph County | Rural | No | 163.3 (150.5, 177.1) | 48 (16, 74) | 126 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.6) |
| Lake County | Rural | No | 192.2 (163.4, 226.1) | 9 (1, 71) | 38 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.9, -0.3) |
| Presque Isle County | Rural | No | 146.8 (124.9, 172.7) | 73 (15, 83) | 40 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.8, -0.5) |
| Saginaw County | Urban | No | 154.7 (147.1, 162.6) | 61 (38, 75) | 338 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.3, -0.8) |
| Benzie County | Urban | No | 148.6 (128.2, 171.9) | 71 (15, 83) | 46 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.9, -0.4) |
| Dickinson County | Rural | No | 141.3 (125.3, 159.3) | 75 (36, 83) | 61 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.7, -0.7) |
| Grand Traverse County | Urban | No | 139.5 (130.6, 149.1) | 77 (61, 82) | 192 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.6, -0.8) |
| Iron County | Rural | No | 174.9 (148.6, 205.8) | 29 (2, 80) | 40 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-2.0, -0.5) |
| Genesee County | Urban | No | 168.3 (162.8, 174.0) | 36 (22, 56) | 745 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-3.7, -0.9) |
| Antrim County | Rural | No | 151.4 (134.1, 170.8) | 68 (19, 82) | 64 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.9, -0.9) |
| Clinton County | Urban | No | 135.3 (125.1, 146.2) | 80 (61, 83) | 135 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.7, -0.9) |
| Oakland County | Urban | No | 139.6 (136.7, 142.6) | 76 (70, 81) | 1,882 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.5, -1.3) |
| Washtenaw County | Urban | No | 134.2 (128.5, 140.1) | 81 (72, 83) | 440 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.6, -1.2) |
| Barry County | Urban | No | 152.7 (140.7, 165.6) | 64 (28, 81) | 126 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-3.9, -0.9) |
| Leelanau County | Urban | Yes | 114.6 (100.2, 131.4) | 83 (76, 83) | 55 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.0, -0.8) |
| Livingston County | Urban | No | 147.6 (140.7, 154.7) | 72 (53, 80) | 374 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.8, -1.2) |
| Mackinac County | Rural | No | 145.3 (119.4, 177.8) | 74 (9, 83) | 27 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.6, -1.0) |
| Keweenaw County | Rural | No | 133.9 (87.3, 210.4) | 82 (1, 83) | 6 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-3.6, -0.2) |
| Wayne County | Urban | No | 159.1 (155.9, 162.3) | 58 (42, 66) | 2,005 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.8, -1.4) |
| Gogebic County | Rural | No | 135.7 (115.5, 159.4) | 79 (31, 83) | 37 |
falling
|
-4.1 (-14.4, -1.6) |
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/05/2024 6:13 am.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
† 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.
6 Hispanic mortality recent trend data for the United States has been excluded for the following states: Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. The data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality for these states may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2022) and has been excluded from the calculation of the United States recent trend. This was based on the NCHS Policy.
Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
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.
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/05/2024 6:13 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.
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.
6 Hispanic mortality recent trend data for the United States has been excluded for the following states: Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. The data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality for these states may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2022) and has been excluded from the calculation of the United States recent trend. This was based on the NCHS Policy.
Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
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.