Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Nebraska by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by CI*Rank

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 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
Nebraska N/A No 863.0 (848.1, 878.0) N/A 2,635 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -1.0)
United States N/A No 844.0 (842.9, 845.1) N/A 441,232 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.5)
Thurston County Rural No 1,714.6 (1,315.9, 2,195.1) 1 (1, 8) 13 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.9, 2.1)
Nance County Rural No 1,328.8 (931.7, 1,832.8) 2 (1, 70) 8 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.8, 2.4)
Webster County Rural No 1,286.0 (943.5, 1,711.8) 3 (1, 62) 9 rising rising trend 2.4 (0.7, 11.9)
Hitchcock County Rural No 1,247.7 (891.2, 1,698.3) 4 (1, 67) 8 rising rising trend 1.4 (0.2, 2.6)
Jefferson County Rural No 1,099.9 (886.6, 1,348.7) 5 (2, 62) 19 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.6)
Harlan County Rural No 1,030.6 (744.3, 1,390.4) 6 (2, 75) 9
*
*
Boyd County Rural No 1,029.3 (685.2, 1,486.5) 7 (1, 77) 6 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.8, 2.0)
Nuckolls County Rural No 1,017.9 (767.5, 1,323.6) 8 (2, 73) 11 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.4)
Nemaha County Rural No 1,016.4 (789.5, 1,288.0) 9 (2, 71) 14 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.3)
Butler County Rural No 1,015.1 (808.4, 1,258.2) 10 (2, 70) 17 stable stable trend 3.3 (-0.1, 18.3)
Lincoln County Rural No 993.1 (888.5, 1,106.5) 11 (4, 45) 67 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.7, 0.3)
Red Willow County Rural No 979.8 (804.8, 1,181.7) 12 (2, 67) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Richardson County Rural No 940.5 (753.8, 1,159.3) 13 (3, 72) 18 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 0.9)
Fillmore County Rural No 932.0 (711.8, 1,199.1) 14 (3, 76) 13 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.9, 0.9)
Colfax County Rural No 928.4 (717.4, 1,182.4) 15 (2, 76) 14 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.1)
Boone County Rural No 921.6 (703.9, 1,186.6) 16 (2, 76) 13 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.1)
Seward County Urban No 914.2 (767.7, 1,080.5) 17 (4, 70) 28 falling falling trend -1.9 (-7.1, -0.5)
Sarpy County Urban No 909.6 (852.7, 969.2) 18 (12, 50) 196 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.5)
Gage County Rural No 909.3 (788.0, 1,043.8) 19 (6, 66) 42 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.0, 0.3)
Keith County Rural No 908.3 (739.4, 1,104.3) 20 (4, 74) 20 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.4)
Franklin County Rural No 907.7 (632.3, 1,261.5) 21 (2, 77) 7 stable stable trend 5.7 (-1.6, 29.3)
Douglas County Urban No 905.2 (874.1, 937.1) 22 (15, 42) 662 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -1.1)
Garden County Rural No 903.5 (583.1, 1,337.8) 23 (1, 77) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.4, 1.5)
Chase County Rural No 899.9 (629.6, 1,245.9) 24 (2, 77) 8 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.5, 1.5)
Dodge County Rural No 899.3 (802.8, 1,004.2) 25 (7, 63) 64 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.8, 0.5)
Cheyenne County Rural No 897.9 (717.4, 1,110.0) 26 (3, 74) 18 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.4)
Dawes County Rural No 896.9 (700.1, 1,131.7) 27 (3, 76) 15 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.1)
Hamilton County Rural No 893.3 (709.5, 1,109.8) 28 (4, 75) 17 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.2)
Morrill County Rural No 886.5 (643.4, 1,191.3) 29 (2, 77) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.5)
York County Rural No 884.7 (737.6, 1,052.5) 30 (6, 73) 26 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.3)
Johnson County Rural No 883.4 (635.2, 1,195.7) 31 (2, 77) 9 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.5, 0.4)
Brown County Rural No 882.9 (602.4, 1,248.1) 32 (2, 77) 7 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.7)
Box Butte County Rural No 879.1 (701.3, 1,088.0) 33 (4, 74) 18 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Adams County Rural No 879.0 (772.8, 995.7) 34 (8, 67) 50 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Clay County Rural No 872.4 (646.6, 1,151.2) 35 (3, 77) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.2)
Dawson County Rural No 868.9 (743.5, 1,009.6) 36 (6, 71) 35 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Dixon County Rural No 865.6 (640.9, 1,143.8) 37 (3, 77) 10 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.2, 1.2)
Washington County Urban No 857.8 (725.4, 1,007.2) 38 (6, 74) 31 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.4, -0.1)
Burt County Rural No 854.7 (663.2, 1,084.2) 39 (3, 77) 14 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.5)
Dakota County Urban No 851.8 (703.3, 1,022.4) 40 (6, 74) 23 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.2)
Otoe County Rural No 851.1 (711.9, 1,009.5) 41 (7, 74) 27 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Gosper County Rural No 850.4 (492.6, 1,360.6) 42 (1, 77) 3 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.5, 2.2)
Thayer County Rural No 836.7 (623.3, 1,099.3) 43 (3, 77) 11 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.8)
Platte County Rural No 835.8 (733.8, 948.0) 44 (11, 71) 50 falling falling trend -1.7 (-4.3, -0.8)
Saunders County Urban No 832.3 (710.8, 968.8) 45 (9, 74) 34 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.5, 0.0)
Buffalo County Rural No 828.2 (737.6, 926.9) 46 (15, 70) 62 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Lancaster County Urban No 825.5 (787.3, 865.1) 47 (29, 61) 362 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -1.1)
Hall County Urban No 824.6 (743.2, 912.4) 48 (16, 70) 76 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.5)
Pawnee County Rural No 824.2 (554.1, 1,179.6) 49 (2, 77) 6 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.3, 1.0)
Holt County Rural No 820.6 (660.3, 1,007.9) 50 (7, 76) 19 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Phelps County Rural No 813.2 (643.4, 1,014.5) 51 (6, 77) 16 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.3, 1.1)
Cass County Urban No 811.9 (694.9, 942.6) 52 (11, 74) 36 falling falling trend -3.4 (-12.6, -1.2)
Kimball County Rural No 807.1 (562.4, 1,121.8) 53 (3, 77) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 0.9)
Sherman County Rural No 801.9 (552.5, 1,126.7) 54 (3, 77) 7 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.0)
Polk County Rural No 800.4 (583.2, 1,072.1) 55 (4, 77) 9 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.3, 1.6)
Cherry County Rural No 796.6 (585.6, 1,058.6) 56 (4, 77) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.7)
Scotts Bluff County Rural No 795.6 (703.2, 896.8) 57 (18, 73) 55 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.1)
Deuel County Rural No 792.6 (460.4, 1,266.1) 58 (2, 77) 3 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.8, -0.2)
Valley County Rural No 789.2 (565.7, 1,072.0) 59 (4, 77) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.8)
Knox County Rural No 779.8 (619.4, 969.1) 60 (9, 77) 17 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.0)
Perkins County Rural No 775.2 (500.6, 1,145.6) 61 (3, 77) 5 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.4, 0.9)
Merrick County Urban No 774.1 (591.6, 994.9) 62 (6, 77) 12 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.0)
Madison County Rural No 769.0 (669.2, 879.5) 63 (18, 75) 44 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.2)
Cedar County Rural No 756.9 (588.6, 958.6) 64 (9, 77) 14 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.4)
Wayne County Rural No 750.2 (564.9, 976.2) 65 (7, 77) 11 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.2)
Howard County Urban No 750.2 (559.0, 985.4) 66 (8, 77) 10 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.4)
Furnas County Rural No 749.5 (541.1, 1,011.2) 67 (5, 77) 9 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Greeley County Rural No 745.5 (462.2, 1,141.0) 68 (3, 77) 4
*
*
Kearney County Rural No 741.9 (545.3, 985.8) 69 (6, 77) 10 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.0)
Sheridan County Rural No 739.2 (545.1, 979.7) 70 (7, 77) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Garfield County Rural No 735.8 (444.3, 1,144.8) 71 (3, 77) 4 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.2, 1.1)
Pierce County Rural No 726.4 (537.5, 959.4) 72 (9, 77) 10 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.0)
Stanton County Rural No 726.0 (514.6, 994.0) 73 (6, 77) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.1, 0.6)
Custer County Rural No 688.0 (546.3, 855.2) 74 (20, 77) 17 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Saline County Rural No 686.6 (541.2, 859.0) 75 (18, 77) 16 falling falling trend -4.5 (-17.2, -0.5)
Cuming County Rural No 684.2 (529.0, 870.5) 76 (18, 77) 14 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Antelope County Rural No 637.6 (467.1, 849.5) 77 (17, 77) 9 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.3, 0.0)
Arthur County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Banner County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Blaine County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dundy County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Frontier County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hayes County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hooker County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Keya Paha County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Logan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Loup County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
McPherson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rock County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sioux County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Thomas County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wheeler County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/22/2024 4:00 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.

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