Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for South Dakota by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Recentaapc

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 ascending
South Dakota N/A No 147.9 (144.6, 151.4) N/A 1,581 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.3, -1.0)
United States 6 N/A No 151.3 (151.1, 151.5) N/A 463,400 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.1)
Hand County Rural No 141.8 (98.0, 202.6) 30 (4, 59) 8 stable stable trend 22.4 (-1.6, 41.4)
Hanson County Rural No 276.1 (182.1, 397.2) 1 (1, 40) 7 rising rising trend 2.2 (0.5, 4.1)
Mellette County Rural No 256.6 (145.8, 444.3) 2 (1, 59) 3 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.8, 2.9)
McCook County Urban No 200.5 (157.7, 252.6) 8 (1, 40) 16 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.5, 1.9)
Aurora County Rural No 198.5 (141.0, 276.7) 9 (1, 52) 9 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.3, 1.8)
Perkins County Rural No 142.0 (99.6, 203.0) 28 (4, 59) 8 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.7, 2.2)
Bon Homme County Rural No 153.3 (119.3, 195.4) 17 (5, 56) 16 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.4)
Hamlin County Rural No 179.1 (136.5, 231.5) 13 (2, 51) 13 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 0.8)
Hughes County Rural No 167.0 (142.8, 194.6) 15 (5, 42) 36 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 0.8)
Miner County Rural No 150.0 (96.1, 229.1) 22 (3, 59) 5 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.3)
Jackson County Rural No 216.2 (128.2, 353.2) 4 (1, 58) 4 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.4, 1.9)
Moody County Rural No 122.9 (90.2, 165.8) 50 (10, 59) 10 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.8)
Faulk County Rural No 208.0 (143.1, 297.9) 6 (1, 52) 8 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.4)
Butte County Rural No 179.4 (148.6, 215.5) 12 (3, 41) 25 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 0.9)
Gregory County Rural No 150.2 (107.5, 207.8) 21 (3, 59) 10 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.3)
Clay County Rural No 163.8 (133.7, 199.1) 16 (4, 51) 22 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Lincoln County Urban Yes 114.7 (103.2, 127.1) 54 (36, 58) 76 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 3.1)
Lyman County Rural No 191.1 (134.3, 272.3) 10 (1, 55) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.4)
Marshall County Rural Yes 104.9 (73.0, 150.4) 57 (18, 59) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Brookings County Rural No 142.2 (124.0, 162.5) 27 (13, 52) 46 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Minnehaha County Urban No 176.4 (167.7, 185.4) 14 (6, 20) 336 falling falling trend -0.7 (-0.9, -0.4)
Fall River County Rural No 180.0 (145.9, 222.9) 11 (2, 43) 23 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.2)
Grant County Rural No 141.2 (113.0, 176.2) 31 (8, 57) 19 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.0)
Lake County Rural No 143.6 (116.5, 176.0) 26 (8, 56) 22 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.2)
Clark County Rural No 134.8 (94.3, 190.2) 39 (6, 59) 8 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.4)
Kingsbury County Rural No 137.1 (102.9, 181.3) 36 (7, 59) 12 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 0.1)
Charles Mix County Rural No 133.4 (100.6, 175.0) 41 (8, 59) 14 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.1)
Codington County Rural No 148.4 (131.3, 167.4) 24 (12, 48) 58 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.5)
Brown County Rural No 138.8 (123.9, 155.2) 34 (16, 51) 68 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Haakon County Rural No 145.1 (94.0, 226.0) 25 (3, 59) 5 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.9, 0.8)
Meade County Urban No 150.6 (132.3, 171.0) 20 (9, 48) 52 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.2)
Pennington County Urban No 152.7 (143.1, 162.8) 18 (13, 37) 209 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.8)
Beadle County Rural No 140.4 (119.1, 165.2) 32 (11, 55) 35 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.5)
Custer County Urban No 140.2 (114.4, 173.2) 33 (9, 57) 24 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Lawrence County Rural No 137.4 (120.7, 156.1) 35 (16, 53) 54 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.6)
Roberts County Rural No 135.1 (104.6, 174.5) 38 (9, 58) 16 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.3, -0.2)
Deuel County Rural No 126.6 (91.0, 174.5) 48 (8, 59) 9 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.6, 0.0)
Hutchinson County Rural No 149.1 (119.8, 185.0) 23 (7, 55) 20 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.2)
Union County Urban No 152.5 (129.6, 178.7) 19 (7, 49) 33 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.5)
Davison County Rural No 129.7 (110.8, 151.2) 46 (18, 57) 37 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.6)
Day County Rural No 133.2 (103.4, 172.9) 43 (9, 58) 15 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.4)
Douglas County Rural Yes 117.6 (74.7, 181.0) 52 (7, 59) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.1, 0.1)
McPherson County Rural Yes 95.5 (61.8, 151.8) 59 (20, 59) 5 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.1, 0.2)
Potter County Rural Yes 111.3 (74.2, 170.9) 56 (10, 59) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.0, 0.2)
Yankton County Rural Yes 119.5 (103.5, 137.8) 51 (27, 58) 43 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.7)
Campbell County Rural Yes 96.2 (54.1, 186.7) 58 (8, 59) 3 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.4, 0.3)
Sanborn County Rural No 136.6 (87.4, 209.4) 37 (4, 59) 5 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.0, -0.2)
Tripp County Rural No 129.8 (94.9, 176.3) 45 (8, 59) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.4)
Turner County Urban No 127.5 (101.4, 159.3) 47 (13, 58) 18 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.7)
Brule County Rural Yes 112.1 (79.5, 156.4) 55 (14, 59) 9 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.3)
Walworth County Rural No 141.9 (107.6, 187.4) 29 (6, 58) 13 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.2, -0.2)
Spink County Rural Yes 115.1 (85.3, 153.5) 53 (15, 59) 12 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.8)
Sully County Rural No 132.2 (69.8, 238.7) 44 (2, 59) 3 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.8, 0.4)
Edmunds County Rural No 124.6 (88.6, 173.7) 49 (8, 59) 8 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.6)
Stanley County Rural No 133.2 (89.6, 196.0) 42 (4, 59) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -0.8)
Dewey County Rural No 244.0 (141.8, 401.6) 3 (1, 58) 4
*
*
Hyde County Rural No 200.9 (122.2, 329.9) 7 (1, 58) 5
*
*
Jerauld County Rural No 134.8 (83.0, 221.6) 40 (3, 59) 5
*
*
Jones County Rural No 210.2 (123.4, 366.8) 5 (1, 59) 4
*
*
Bennett County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Buffalo County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Corson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harding County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oglala Lakota County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Todd County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ziebach County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/04/2024 4:36 am.

South Dakota County Name Change: please note that Shannon County, SD (FIPS code=46113) was renamed effective May 1, 2015, and the new name is Oglala Lakota County (FIPS Code=46102). This website now uses Oglala Lakota.

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.
6 Hispanic mortality recent trend data for the United States has been excluded for the following states: Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. The data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality for these states may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2022) and has been excluded from the calculation of the United States recent trend. This was based on the NCHS Policy.

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