Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Minnesota by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Ruralurban

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 25.1?
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
Minnesota N/A No 29.7 (29.1, 30.2) N/A 2,154 falling falling trend -4.1 (-5.0, -3.6)
United States N/A No 32.4 (32.3, 32.5) N/A 136,831 falling falling trend -4.3 (-4.4, -4.1)
Aitkin County Rural No 40.3 (31.0, 53.0) 14 (3, 70) 15 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.4, 0.0)
Becker County Rural No 28.6 (22.6, 36.0) 59 (17, 81) 16 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.7)
Beltrami County Rural No 31.5 (25.3, 38.9) 43 (12, 79) 18 falling falling trend -4.1 (-14.2, -1.9)
Brown County Rural No 34.3 (26.6, 43.9) 33 (5, 77) 14 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.9, 1.5)
Cass County Rural No 36.7 (29.8, 45.1) 22 (6, 67) 21 falling falling trend -17.8 (-31.1, -1.2)
Chippewa County Rural No 44.7 (32.0, 61.6) 9 (2, 74) 9 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.0, 1.1)
Clearwater County Rural No 39.9 (25.2, 61.0) 16 (1, 81) 5
*
*
Cottonwood County Rural No 30.7 (20.2, 45.6) 50 (5, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.0, 1.4)
Crow Wing County Rural No 32.1 (27.6, 37.2) 41 (17, 72) 38 falling falling trend -5.2 (-8.3, -2.5)
Douglas County Rural No 30.1 (24.5, 36.7) 53 (18, 79) 21 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.6)
Faribault County Rural No 35.6 (25.7, 49.0) 27 (4, 80) 9 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.1, 2.0)
Freeborn County Rural No 34.2 (27.2, 42.7) 34 (8, 77) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Goodhue County Rural No 32.1 (26.5, 38.8) 40 (14, 77) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Grant County Rural No 31.1 (18.1, 52.8) 44 (3, 81) 3 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.9, 2.4)
Hubbard County Rural No 29.7 (22.2, 39.6) 57 (11, 81) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.3)
Itasca County Rural No 43.3 (36.7, 50.9) 11 (3, 41) 34 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Jackson County Rural Yes 21.6 (12.6, 36.0) 80 (20, 81) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.7, 1.6)
Kanabec County Rural No 48.4 (36.9, 63.0) 7 (1, 50) 13 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.5)
Kandiyohi County Rural No 26.0 (20.5, 32.6) 73 (27, 81) 16 falling falling trend -8.0 (-23.2, -1.7)
Kittson County Rural No 54.3 (30.9, 91.5) 4 (1, 80) 4
*
*
Koochiching County Rural No 25.4 (17.1, 38.1) 75 (14, 81) 6 falling falling trend -6.2 (-17.2, -3.3)
Lake County Rural No 38.1 (27.3, 53.5) 20 (3, 79) 9 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.5, -0.8)
Lincoln County Rural No 40.5 (24.5, 65.8) 13 (1, 81) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.8, 0.4)
Lyon County Rural No 30.0 (22.1, 40.0) 55 (10, 81) 10 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.9)
Mahnomen County Rural No 81.8 (54.7, 119.0) 1 (1, 21) 6 rising rising trend 2.0 (0.4, 4.1)
Marshall County Rural No 26.9 (16.7, 42.7) 68 (9, 81) 4 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.2, 2.7)
Martin County Rural No 36.1 (26.9, 47.9) 23 (4, 78) 12 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.3, 1.7)
McLeod County Rural No 27.7 (21.7, 35.0) 65 (19, 81) 15 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.4)
Meeker County Rural No 36.0 (27.6, 46.5) 24 (5, 76) 13 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.4)
Morrison County Rural No 32.5 (25.8, 40.6) 39 (9, 79) 17 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.6)
Mower County Rural No 30.0 (23.8, 37.4) 56 (14, 80) 17 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.2, -0.1)
Murray County Rural No 31.1 (20.0, 48.3) 46 (5, 81) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.0, 2.1)
Nobles County Rural No 29.3 (20.8, 40.2) 58 (9, 81) 8 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.3)
Norman County Rural No 49.7 (32.2, 75.2) 5 (1, 78) 5 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.8, 2.5)
Otter Tail County Rural No 32.9 (27.9, 38.7) 38 (13, 72) 34 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Pennington County Rural No 38.7 (27.7, 53.4) 18 (3, 79) 8 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.4)
Pine County Rural No 44.3 (36.2, 54.1) 10 (3, 47) 21 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.5)
Pipestone County Rural No 47.4 (32.6, 67.7) 8 (1, 73) 7 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.3, 1.7)
Pope County Rural No 30.7 (19.8, 46.4) 49 (5, 81) 6 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.4, -0.3)
Redwood County Rural No 30.5 (21.3, 43.0) 51 (6, 81) 7 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.3, 1.2)
Renville County Rural No 26.1 (17.5, 38.2) 71 (12, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Rice County Rural No 30.8 (25.6, 36.8) 48 (17, 77) 26 stable stable trend -4.3 (-16.7, 7.3)
Roseau County Rural No 34.0 (23.8, 47.7) 35 (4, 81) 7 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.3)
Sibley County Rural No 31.0 (21.2, 44.3) 47 (6, 81) 7 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.3)
Steele County Rural No 27.9 (21.7, 35.4) 64 (19, 81) 15 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.2)
Swift County Rural No 31.9 (20.9, 48.1) 42 (4, 81) 5 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.1)
Todd County Rural No 28.4 (21.4, 37.3) 62 (15, 81) 12 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -1.0)
Traverse County Rural No 54.4 (31.5, 92.9) 3 (1, 81) 3
*
*
Wadena County Rural No 59.2 (45.5, 76.4) 2 (1, 27) 13 stable stable trend 1.2 (0.0, 2.6)
Waseca County Rural Yes 25.0 (17.1, 35.8) 77 (15, 81) 7 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.1)
Watonwan County Rural No 38.3 (25.6, 55.8) 19 (2, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.2, 1.5)
Wilkin County Rural No 49.5 (31.2, 76.1) 6 (1, 78) 5
*
*
Winona County Rural No 39.5 (32.8, 47.3) 17 (4, 61) 26 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Yellow Medicine County Rural No 28.6 (17.9, 44.6) 60 (6, 81) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.2, 1.1)
Anoka County Urban No 30.0 (27.7, 32.5) 54 (31, 67) 127 falling falling trend -10.6 (-17.1, -6.7)
Benton County Urban No 34.8 (27.3, 43.7) 31 (6, 76) 16 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.6)
Blue Earth County Urban No 30.5 (25.0, 36.8) 52 (16, 78) 23 stable stable trend -1.0 (-1.9, 0.0)
Carlton County Urban No 41.7 (34.0, 50.9) 12 (3, 54) 21 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.2)
Carver County Urban Yes 21.5 (17.7, 26.0) 81 (58, 81) 23 falling falling trend -8.9 (-18.9, -4.5)
Chisago County Urban No 40.2 (33.8, 47.5) 15 (4, 52) 29 falling falling trend -2.0 (-6.4, -1.1)
Clay County Urban No 33.2 (27.3, 40.0) 37 (10, 75) 23 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.6)
Dakota County Urban No 25.2 (23.3, 27.3) 76 (57, 79) 129 falling falling trend -5.7 (-8.8, -4.1)
Dodge County Urban Yes 24.2 (16.2, 34.9) 79 (17, 81) 6 falling falling trend -9.3 (-26.9, -2.3)
Fillmore County Urban No 27.9 (20.3, 37.9) 63 (13, 81) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.9)
Hennepin County Urban No 25.7 (24.5, 26.9) 74 (58, 78) 371 falling falling trend -3.8 (-4.5, -3.3)
Houston County Urban No 26.8 (18.7, 37.7) 69 (13, 81) 8 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.4)
Isanti County Urban No 35.4 (28.5, 43.6) 28 (6, 76) 19 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.8)
Le Sueur County Urban No 35.2 (27.4, 44.9) 29 (6, 77) 14 falling falling trend -2.8 (-13.5, -1.1)
Mille Lacs County Urban No 37.7 (29.2, 48.1) 21 (4, 74) 14 falling falling trend -4.9 (-16.6, -1.5)
Nicollet County Urban Yes 24.6 (18.6, 32.2) 78 (27, 81) 12 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.3, 0.2)
Olmsted County Urban No 26.4 (23.3, 29.9) 70 (43, 80) 53 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
Polk County Urban No 34.5 (27.1, 43.6) 32 (7, 77) 15 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.4)
Ramsey County Urban No 28.4 (26.6, 30.4) 61 (42, 72) 182 falling falling trend -3.8 (-4.7, -3.2)
Rock County Urban No 35.2 (23.3, 52.3) 30 (3, 81) 6
*
*
Scott County Urban No 27.3 (23.5, 31.6) 66 (33, 79) 38 falling falling trend -5.3 (-10.6, -3.1)
Sherburne County Urban No 35.7 (30.3, 41.8) 26 (8, 66) 33 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.2)
St. Louis County Urban No 35.9 (32.9, 39.2) 25 (13, 49) 110 falling falling trend -2.7 (-5.3, -1.7)
Stearns County Urban No 31.1 (27.6, 34.9) 45 (21, 71) 59 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.6)
Wabasha County Urban No 27.1 (19.8, 36.8) 67 (15, 81) 10 falling falling trend -5.9 (-23.4, -1.8)
Washington County Urban No 26.0 (23.5, 28.7) 72 (49, 79) 85 falling falling trend -6.4 (-15.3, -2.6)
Wright County Urban No 33.6 (29.5, 38.2) 36 (14, 65) 50 falling falling trend -3.0 (-6.9, -1.6)
Big Stone County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cook County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lac qui Parle County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake of the Woods County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Red Lake County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stevens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/09/2024 11:47 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.

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