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)
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Carolina | *** | 13.0 (12.7, 13.3) | N/A | 1,591 |
falling 
|
-2.5 (-2.7, -2.3) |
| United States | *** | 13.4 (13.4, 13.5) | N/A | 52,258 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-2.1, -1.7) |
| Washington County | *** | 27.1 (16.7, 42.5) | 1 (1, 77) | 5 |
stable 
|
-1.9 (-3.8, 0.1) |
| Anson County | *** | 23.7 (16.8, 32.8) | 2 (1, 61) | 8 |
rising 
|
6.3 (0.3, 12.8) |
| Caswell County | *** | 23.4 (16.5, 32.7) | 3 (1, 62) | 8 |
stable
|
-0.4 (-2.0, 1.2) |
| Swain County | *** | 22.4 (13.8, 34.8) | 4 (1, 87) | 4 |
stable
|
0.6 (-1.5, 2.7) |
| Scotland County | *** | 21.0 (15.3, 28.2) | 5 (1, 72) | 9 |
stable
|
-1.4 (-3.1, 0.2) |
| Person County | *** | 20.5 (15.3, 27.0) | 6 (1, 62) | 11 |
stable
|
-1.6 (-3.2, 0.1) |
| Halifax County | *** | 20.3 (15.9, 25.7) | 7 (1, 55) | 15 |
stable
|
-0.9 (-1.8, 0.1) |
| Hertford County | *** | 18.7 (12.5, 27.2) | 8 (1, 88) | 6 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-3.4, -0.3) |
| Pasquotank County | *** | 18.6 (13.5, 25.2) | 9 (1, 80) | 9 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.9, -0.4) |
| Robeson County | *** | 17.8 (14.8, 21.3) | 10 (2, 59) | 26 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.7, -0.2) |
| Mitchell County | *** | 17.5 (10.4, 28.5) | 11 (1, 89) | 4 |
stable
|
-1.2 (-2.8, 0.4) |
| Vance County | *** | 17.4 (12.9, 23.2) | 12 (2, 85) | 10 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.8, -0.2) |
| Beaufort County | *** | 17.3 (12.9, 22.9) | 13 (2, 82) | 12 |
stable
|
-1.4 (-2.7, 0.0) |
| Bertie County | *** | 17.1 (10.9, 26.3) | 14 (1, 89) | 5 |
falling
|
-5.0 (-6.7, -3.2) |
| Edgecombe County | *** | 17.1 (13.1, 22.2) | 15 (2, 79) | 13 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.7, -0.8) |
| Montgomery County | *** | 17.0 (11.3, 24.7) | 16 (1, 88) | 6 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-4.0, -0.6) |
| Cherokee County | *** | 16.8 (11.9, 23.6) | 17 (1, 85) | 9 |
stable
|
-1.3 (-2.9, 0.3) |
| Northampton County | *** | 16.8 (11.2, 25.1) | 18 (1, 88) | 6 |
falling
|
-2.6 (-3.9, -1.2) |
| Carteret County | *** | 16.7 (13.3, 20.9) | 19 (3, 76) | 19 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.6, -0.3) |
| Lenoir County | *** | 16.5 (12.6, 21.4) | 20 (2, 81) | 13 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.9, -0.6) |
| Wayne County | *** | 16.4 (13.6, 19.7) | 21 (4, 69) | 24 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.9, -1.2) |
| Burke County | *** | 16.4 (13.3, 20.1) | 22 (4, 76) | 21 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-2.4, -0.3) |
| Rutherford County | *** | 16.3 (12.8, 20.5) | 23 (3, 80) | 16 |
stable
|
-1.0 (-2.2, 0.3) |
| Rockingham County | *** | 16.2 (13.3, 19.7) | 24 (4, 72) | 22 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.3, -0.6) |
| Ashe County | *** | 16.2 (10.9, 23.6) | 25 (2, 88) | 7 |
stable
|
-1.3 (-3.1, 0.6) |
| Jackson County | *** | 16.0 (11.3, 22.2) | 26 (2, 87) | 8 |
stable
|
-0.6 (-2.1, 0.9) |
| Macon County | *** | 16.0 (11.2, 22.4) | 27 (2, 86) | 9 |
stable
|
-1.1 (-2.7, 0.6) |
| Richmond County | *** | 15.6 (11.4, 21.0) | 28 (3, 86) | 9 |
falling
|
-2.5 (-3.8, -1.2) |
| Columbus County | *** | 15.5 (11.8, 20.2) | 29 (3, 85) | 12 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-3.0, -0.4) |
| Onslow County | *** | 15.5 (12.7, 18.7) | 30 (6, 78) | 22 |
falling
|
-2.5 (-3.8, -1.3) |
| Bladen County | *** | 15.3 (10.8, 21.4) | 31 (2, 88) | 8 |
falling
|
-2.8 (-4.0, -1.5) |
| Johnston County | *** | 15.3 (12.9, 18.0) | 32 (8, 73) | 31 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.4, -0.6) |
| Granville County | *** | 15.2 (11.5, 19.8) | 33 (4, 85) | 12 |
falling
|
-6.0 (-9.8, -1.9) |
| Stanly County | *** | 15.0 (11.5, 19.3) | 34 (4, 85) | 13 |
falling
|
-2.9 (-4.2, -1.6) |
| Catawba County | *** | 15.0 (12.6, 17.7) | 35 (9, 77) | 29 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.9, -1.1) |
| Warren County | *** | 14.9 (9.1, 23.5) | 36 (1, 89) | 5 |
stable
|
-1.7 (-3.6, 0.1) |
| Stokes County | *** | 14.9 (10.9, 20.0) | 37 (4, 88) | 10 |
stable
|
-0.8 (-2.2, 0.7) |
| Harnett County | *** | 14.8 (11.9, 18.3) | 38 (7, 83) | 18 |
falling
|
-2.7 (-3.5, -2.0) |
| Sampson County | *** | 14.7 (11.2, 19.1) | 39 (5, 87) | 12 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-3.0, -1.0) |
| Iredell County | *** | 14.6 (12.3, 17.3) | 40 (11, 75) | 29 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.8, -1.4) |
| Gaston County | *** | 14.4 (12.4, 16.7) | 41 (13, 76) | 37 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.3, -1.0) |
| Rowan County | *** | 14.3 (11.9, 17.0) | 42 (11, 81) | 26 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.8, -0.3) |
| Craven County | *** | 14.2 (11.3, 17.6) | 43 (8, 84) | 19 |
falling
|
-2.9 (-4.2, -1.6) |
| Cleveland County | *** | 14.1 (11.3, 17.5) | 44 (9, 85) | 18 |
stable
|
-1.0 (-2.2, 0.2) |
| Nash County | *** | 14.1 (11.2, 17.5) | 45 (9, 84) | 17 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.8, -0.6) |
| Lee County | *** | 13.9 (10.4, 18.3) | 46 (7, 87) | 11 |
stable
|
-1.5 (-3.1, 0.1) |
| Caldwell County | *** | 13.9 (10.9, 17.5) | 47 (8, 86) | 16 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.6, -0.8) |
| Chowan County | *** | 13.7 (8.1, 23.0) | 48 (2, 89) | 4 |
falling
|
-3.4 (-5.2, -1.5) |
| Wilkes County | *** | 13.6 (10.4, 17.4) | 49 (9, 87) | 14 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.7, -0.1) |
| Davie County | *** | 13.4 (9.7, 18.3) | 50 (7, 89) | 9 |
falling
|
-3.4 (-4.9, -1.8) |
| Yancey County | *** | 13.3 (8.1, 21.6) | 51 (3, 89) | 4 |
stable
|
-1.2 (-3.0, 0.6) |
| McDowell County | *** | 13.3 (9.6, 18.3) | 52 (6, 89) | 9 |
stable
|
-0.9 (-2.3, 0.4) |
| Polk County | *** | 13.3 (9.0, 20.2) | 53 (5, 89) | 6 |
|
|
| Forsyth County | *** | 13.1 (11.6, 14.7) | 54 (26, 79) | 58 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.9, -1.6) |
| Brunswick County | *** | 13.1 (10.8, 15.8) | 55 (18, 85) | 29 |
falling
|
-2.9 (-4.0, -1.8) |
| Franklin County | *** | 13.1 (9.7, 17.3) | 56 (8, 88) | 10 |
falling
|
-2.5 (-3.7, -1.2) |
| Duplin County | *** | 13.1 (9.6, 17.4) | 57 (9, 89) | 10 |
falling
|
-3.3 (-4.5, -2.1) |
| Surry County | *** | 13.0 (10.0, 16.6) | 58 (12, 87) | 14 |
stable
|
-0.6 (-2.1, 0.9) |
| Perquimans County | *** | 12.9 (7.5, 22.4) | 59 (2, 89) | 3 |
stable
|
-1.3 (-3.3, 0.7) |
| Davidson County | *** | 12.8 (10.7, 15.2) | 60 (21, 85) | 28 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.4, -1.0) |
| Martin County | *** | 12.8 (8.0, 19.9) | 61 (4, 89) | 5 |
falling
|
-2.8 (-4.8, -0.8) |
| Alamance County | *** | 12.6 (10.5, 15.0) | 62 (23, 85) | 27 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.9, -1.5) |
| Cumberland County | *** | 12.5 (10.7, 14.4) | 63 (29, 84) | 38 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.9, -1.6) |
| Union County | *** | 12.4 (10.3, 14.7) | 64 (24, 86) | 28 |
falling
|
-2.4 (-3.2, -1.6) |
| Randolph County | *** | 12.3 (10.2, 14.9) | 65 (23, 87) | 23 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-3.0, -1.2) |
| Buncombe County | *** | 12.3 (10.7, 14.1) | 66 (33, 84) | 45 |
falling
|
-2.8 (-3.4, -2.1) |
| Greene County | *** | 12.2 (6.9, 20.5) | 67 (3, 89) | 3 |
|
|
| Madison County | *** | 12.2 (7.2, 19.8) | 68 (3, 89) | 4 |
stable
|
-1.0 (-2.9, 0.9) |
| Lincoln County | *** | 12.2 (9.4, 15.6) | 69 (15, 88) | 14 |
falling
|
-2.8 (-4.0, -1.6) |
| Alexander County | *** | 12.2 (8.3, 17.5) | 70 (8, 89) | 7 |
stable
|
-1.7 (-3.3, 0.0) |
| Guilford County | *** | 12.1 (10.9, 13.4) | 71 (42, 82) | 75 |
falling
|
-2.7 (-3.4, -2.0) |
| Dare County | *** | 12.1 (8.1, 17.7) | 72 (8, 89) | 7 |
stable
|
-1.7 (-3.4, 0.0) |
| Durham County | *** | 12.1 (10.4, 14.0) | 73 (31, 86) | 38 |
stable
|
-1.3 (-3.1, 0.6) |
| Pender County | *** | 12.0 (8.7, 16.3) | 74 (12, 89) | 9 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-3.7, -0.4) |
| Pitt County | *** | 11.9 (9.7, 14.4) | 75 (27, 88) | 22 |
falling
|
-3.1 (-3.7, -2.5) |
| Moore County | *** | 11.9 (9.4, 14.9) | 76 (20, 88) | 18 |
falling
|
-3.6 (-4.7, -2.5) |
| Cabarrus County | *** | 11.6 (9.7, 13.9) | 77 (31, 88) | 25 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-3.0, -1.3) |
| Henderson County | *** | 11.6 (9.3, 14.4) | 78 (25, 88) | 21 |
falling
|
-2.9 (-3.9, -1.8) |
| Wilson County | *** | 11.4 (8.7, 14.9) | 79 (20, 89) | 12 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.9, -0.4) |
| Mecklenburg County | *** | 11.4 (10.4, 12.4) | 80 (51, 84) | 111 |
falling
|
-2.4 (-2.9, -1.9) |
| Transylvania County | *** | 11.1 (7.3, 16.5) | 81 (12, 89) | 7 |
falling
|
-3.6 (-5.2, -2.0) |
| Haywood County | *** | 10.9 (8.1, 14.5) | 82 (24, 89) | 11 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-3.6, -0.8) |
| Hoke County | *** | 10.3 (6.5, 15.5) | 83 (13, 89) | 5 |
falling
|
-4.0 (-5.6, -2.4) |
| Yadkin County | *** | 10.3 (6.7, 15.5) | 84 (16, 89) | 5 |
falling
|
-3.8 (-5.7, -1.9) |
| Wake County | *** | 10.0 (9.1, 11.0) | 85 (69, 88) | 97 |
falling
|
-3.0 (-3.5, -2.4) |
| Orange County | *** | 10.0 (7.8, 12.7) | 86 (41, 89) | 15 |
falling
|
-3.3 (-4.4, -2.3) |
| Chatham County | *** | 8.9 (6.6, 12.0) | 87 (49, 89) | 11 |
falling
|
-3.3 (-4.8, -1.8) |
| New Hanover County | *** | 8.5 (7.1, 10.3) | 88 (73, 89) | 24 |
falling
|
-3.6 (-4.5, -2.7) |
| Watauga County | *** | 8.0 (4.9, 12.4) | 89 (43, 89) | 5 |
|
|
| Alleghany County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Avery County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Camden County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Clay County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Currituck County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Gates County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Graham County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Hyde County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jones County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Pamlico County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Tyrrell County | *** |
|
|
|
|
|
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/24/2022 9:56 pm.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
Data for the following has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of estimates:
Alleghany, Avery, Camden, Clay, Currituck, Gates, Graham, Hyde, Jones, Pamlico, Tyrrell
† 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.
* 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).
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 06/24/2022 9:56 pm.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
Data for the following has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of estimates:
Alleghany, Avery, Camden, Clay, Currituck, Gates, Graham, Hyde, Jones, Pamlico, Tyrrell
† 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.
* 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).
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.