Death Rates Table
County
|
Met Healthy People Objective of ***? |
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)
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York | *** | 164.7 (163.5, 165.8) | N/A | 17,338 |
falling 
|
-2.9 (-3.4, -2.4) |
| United States | *** | 181.4 (181.1, 181.7) | N/A | 314,987 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.6, -2.0) |
| Rockland County | *** | 138.5 (130.5, 146.8) | 62 (56, 62) | 233 |
falling
|
-2.7 (-3.0, -2.5) |
| New York County | *** | 139.7 (136.1, 143.3) | 61 (57, 62) | 1,181 |
falling
|
-3.7 (-4.5, -2.9) |
| Queens County | *** | 140.7 (137.6, 143.8) | 60 (57, 62) | 1,649 |
falling
|
-3.3 (-4.2, -2.5) |
| Westchester County | *** | 143.8 (139.2, 148.4) | 59 (56, 62) | 787 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.5, -2.1) |
| Nassau County | *** | 144.6 (140.8, 148.4) | 58 (56, 62) | 1,161 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.4, -2.1) |
| Kings County | *** | 153.4 (150.1, 156.7) | 57 (52, 57) | 1,745 |
falling
|
-3.5 (-4.4, -2.5) |
| Dutchess County | *** | 158.0 (149.7, 166.7) | 56 (44, 58) | 282 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.5, -1.8) |
| Tompkins County | *** | 162.3 (146.0, 180.0) | 55 (22, 62) | 77 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.6, -1.5) |
| Tioga County | *** | 163.9 (144.8, 185.1) | 54 (15, 62) | 56 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.9, -1.8) |
| Suffolk County | *** | 165.1 (161.2, 169.2) | 53 (44, 56) | 1,385 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.5, -2.1) |
| Lewis County | *** | 169.4 (142.5, 200.2) | 52 (3, 62) | 29 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.9, -1.5) |
| Putnam County | *** | 170.0 (154.7, 186.3) | 51 (16, 57) | 99 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.7, -1.8) |
| Orange County | *** | 171.8 (163.1, 180.8) | 50 (25, 55) | 312 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.4, -1.9) |
| Cattaraugus County | *** | 171.9 (155.7, 189.4) | 49 (13, 57) | 87 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.1, -1.2) |
| Columbia County | *** | 172.1 (155.5, 190.4) | 48 (11, 58) | 82 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.1, -1.3) |
| Bronx County | *** | 172.2 (167.4, 177.2) | 47 (32, 54) | 1,005 |
falling
|
-3.1 (-4.1, -2.1) |
| Richmond County | *** | 173.0 (165.6, 180.7) | 46 (27, 54) | 432 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.4, -1.9) |
| Otsego County | *** | 173.6 (155.3, 193.8) | 45 (8, 58) | 70 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.2, -0.9) |
| Chenango County | *** | 174.8 (154.9, 196.8) | 44 (6, 58) | 59 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.2, -1.2) |
| Yates County | *** | 175.0 (146.9, 207.5) | 43 (1, 62) | 29 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.7, -1.3) |
| Cortland County | *** | 175.5 (153.1, 200.5) | 42 (4, 61) | 46 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.6, -1.2) |
| Onondaga County | *** | 176.0 (168.7, 183.6) | 41 (22, 53) | 454 |
falling
|
-4.5 (-6.0, -2.9) |
| Schenectady County | *** | 177.4 (164.9, 190.6) | 40 (14, 55) | 158 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.9, -1.1) |
| Madison County | *** | 178.8 (161.0, 198.1) | 39 (5, 57) | 79 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.3, -1.4) |
| Schoharie County | *** | 180.0 (155.7, 207.6) | 38 (2, 59) | 42 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.4, -1.0) |
| Monroe County | *** | 180.2 (174.4, 186.3) | 37 (21, 48) | 746 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.8, -1.5) |
| Ulster County | *** | 180.5 (169.4, 192.1) | 36 (12, 53) | 210 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.4, -1.7) |
| Sullivan County | *** | 180.7 (163.8, 199.0) | 35 (6, 56) | 90 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.5, -1.7) |
| Albany County | *** | 181.1 (171.8, 190.8) | 34 (13, 51) | 301 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.9, -1.4) |
| Franklin County | *** | 181.1 (159.6, 204.7) | 33 (3, 57) | 54 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.5, -1.4) |
| Saratoga County | *** | 181.5 (171.2, 192.3) | 32 (12, 52) | 246 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.8, -1.2) |
| Clinton County | *** | 183.0 (165.9, 201.5) | 31 (5, 55) | 88 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.0, -0.8) |
| Wyoming County | *** | 183.5 (159.5, 210.3) | 30 (2, 57) | 45 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.0, -0.8) |
| Delaware County | *** | 184.0 (164.0, 206.3) | 29 (2, 57) | 67 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.1, -0.9) |
| Cayuga County | *** | 184.9 (168.2, 202.9) | 28 (4, 55) | 94 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.0, -0.7) |
| St. Lawrence County | *** | 185.6 (170.7, 201.5) | 27 (5, 53) | 121 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.2, -1.5) |
| Wayne County | *** | 186.7 (170.9, 203.7) | 26 (4, 53) | 109 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.2, -1.3) |
| Seneca County | *** | 187.0 (162.0, 215.0) | 25 (1, 57) | 42 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.3, -0.9) |
| Broome County | *** | 187.8 (176.8, 199.4) | 24 (6, 48) | 229 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.9, -1.3) |
| Allegany County | *** | 187.9 (166.1, 212.0) | 23 (1, 56) | 57 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.4, -1.3) |
| Rensselaer County | *** | 190.6 (177.5, 204.4) | 22 (3, 47) | 169 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.0, -1.3) |
| Ontario County | *** | 191.4 (176.8, 207.1) | 21 (3, 50) | 134 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.0, -1.2) |
| Montgomery County | *** | 191.5 (169.5, 215.7) | 20 (1, 55) | 58 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.4, -1.2) |
| Herkimer County | *** | 192.0 (173.1, 212.6) | 19 (2, 54) | 80 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.3, -1.1) |
| Chautauqua County | *** | 192.5 (179.1, 206.7) | 18 (3, 47) | 163 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.6, -1.0) |
| Genesee County | *** | 193.4 (173.5, 215.0) | 17 (1, 53) | 72 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.9, -1.1) |
| Erie County | *** | 193.8 (188.5, 199.3) | 16 (8, 30) | 1,039 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.7, -1.4) |
| Livingston County | *** | 196.0 (176.1, 217.7) | 15 (1, 51) | 75 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.2, -1.1) |
| Washington County | *** | 198.0 (178.6, 219.0) | 14 (1, 51) | 81 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.1, -1.2) |
| Fulton County | *** | 198.7 (177.9, 221.5) | 13 (1, 52) | 70 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.9, -0.9) |
| Steuben County | *** | 199.5 (183.9, 216.2) | 12 (1, 42) | 126 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.8, -1.2) |
| Oneida County | *** | 201.2 (190.7, 212.1) | 11 (2, 29) | 289 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.6, -1.0) |
| Niagara County | *** | 203.4 (192.4, 215.0) | 10 (1, 28) | 269 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.6, -1.1) |
| Greene County | *** | 204.5 (183.7, 227.4) | 9 (1, 46) | 74 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.1, -0.9) |
| Oswego County | *** | 204.7 (189.1, 221.4) | 8 (1, 36) | 137 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.7, -0.9) |
| Jefferson County | *** | 204.8 (187.2, 223.6) | 7 (1, 39) | 105 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.9, -0.9) |
| Schuyler County | *** | 204.9 (169.8, 245.8) | 6 (1, 57) | 26 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.7, -0.3) |
| Warren County | *** | 205.7 (187.0, 226.1) | 5 (1, 39) | 95 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.6, -0.5) |
| Essex County | *** | 205.9 (182.7, 231.7) | 4 (1, 48) | 60 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.4, -0.9) |
| Hamilton County | *** | 210.8 (155.4, 291.6) | 3 (1, 62) | 10 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.9, -0.4) |
| Orleans County | *** | 218.6 (192.3, 247.7) | 2 (1, 39) | 54 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.6, -0.2) |
| Chemung County | *** | 219.9 (202.1, 239.0) | 1 (1, 20) | 117 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.7, -0.9) |
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/30/2022 7:15 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 2020 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 1969-2018 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.
*** No Healthy People 2020 Objective for this cancer.
Healthy People 2020 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
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.
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/30/2022 7:15 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 2020 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 1969-2018 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.
*** No Healthy People 2020 Objective for this cancer.
Healthy People 2020 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
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.