Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for North Dakota by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate ascending
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
North Dakota No 167.8 (162.1, 173.6) N/A 695 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.4)
United States No 177.5 (177.2, 177.8) N/A 315,770 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.5, -2.0)
Rolette County No 225.9 (173.6, 288.6) 1 (1, 30) 14 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.3)
Wells County No 221.4 (157.6, 310.9) 2 (1, 35) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.6)
Burke County No 215.9 (121.9, 361.4) 3 (1, 40) 3 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.3)
Nelson County No 212.0 (142.8, 316.6) 4 (1, 38) 6 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.5, 1.3)
Eddy County No 209.7 (126.1, 340.8) 5 (1, 39) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.8, 1.8)
Hettinger County No 201.6 (121.4, 326.0) 6 (1, 40) 4
*
*
Bottineau County No 197.5 (143.4, 268.0) 7 (1, 37) 10 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.4)
Grand Forks County No 196.9 (174.6, 221.1) 8 (2, 26) 60 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Ransom County No 196.6 (137.2, 275.8) 9 (1, 38) 8 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.4)
Dickey County No 191.7 (133.0, 271.4) 10 (1, 38) 7 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.5)
McHenry County No 190.2 (132.1, 266.9) 11 (1, 38) 7 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.1)
Williams County No 189.6 (155.7, 228.1) 12 (2, 34) 25 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.7, 0.0)
Morton County No 189.2 (161.1, 221.0) 13 (3, 32) 34 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
McIntosh County No 185.9 (109.8, 308.0) 14 (1, 40) 5
*
*
Walsh County No 185.3 (144.4, 235.7) 15 (1, 36) 15 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.6)
Stark County No 182.5 (152.4, 216.7) 16 (3, 34) 27 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Pembina County No 181.8 (136.4, 241.0) 17 (1, 37) 12 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -0.9)
Adams County No 181.5 (96.6, 320.3) 18 (1, 40) 3 falling falling trend -2.3 (-4.0, -0.6)
Barnes County No 178.8 (139.1, 228.0) 19 (2, 37) 15 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.6)
McLean County No 178.1 (137.6, 229.0) 20 (2, 37) 14 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.7)
Ramsey County No 177.7 (137.9, 226.5) 21 (2, 37) 14 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.4)
Traill County No 175.1 (129.8, 233.1) 22 (1, 38) 10 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Cass County No 173.6 (160.1, 187.8) 23 (9, 31) 131 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.2, -1.3)
Mercer County No 172.5 (125.5, 232.6) 24 (1, 39) 10 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.7)
Bowman County No 170.3 (103.7, 270.8) 25 (1, 40) 4 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 1.0)
Richland County No 168.5 (134.2, 209.5) 26 (4, 37) 18 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.6)
Pierce County No 165.7 (110.5, 245.3) 27 (1, 40) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.5, -0.3)
Stutsman County No 165.1 (135.3, 199.9) 28 (6, 37) 23 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.8)
Sargent County No 162.6 (106.0, 244.3) 29 (1, 40) 5
*
*
Benson County No 158.5 (102.4, 234.1) 30 (1, 40) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.2, 1.3)
Cavalier County No 153.6 (95.7, 240.0) 31 (1, 40) 5 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.7, -0.7)
Burleigh County No 150.6 (135.8, 166.7) 32 (19, 37) 79 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.1)
Griggs County No 148.3 (86.9, 259.4) 33 (1, 40) 4 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.9, 1.5)
Ward County No 147.9 (128.9, 168.8) 34 (17, 38) 45 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.7, -1.3)
Foster County No 141.0 (80.4, 236.1) 35 (2, 40) 3 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.9, 0.9)
Emmons County No 138.4 (82.8, 228.2) 36 (2, 40) 4 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.5, -1.5)
Mountrail County No 124.2 (80.4, 181.9) 37 (9, 40) 6 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.4, -0.8)
Dunn County No 123.1 (69.5, 203.4) 38 (3, 40) 3 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.9, -0.3)
McKenzie County Yes 110.3 (70.6, 162.2) 39 (15, 40) 5 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.5, -0.7)
LaMoure County Yes 85.5 (47.3, 150.3) 40 (27, 40) 3 falling falling trend -9.2 (-13.1, -5.1)
Billings County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Divide County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Golden Valley County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kidder County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Logan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oliver County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Renville County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sheridan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sioux County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Slope County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Steele County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Towner County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/26/2022 12:12 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.

* 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.

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.

Return to Top