Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Death Rate Report for Texas by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

Hispanic (any race), Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Rate
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
Texas N/A Yes 115.6 (114.5, 116.7) N/A 8,904 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.2)
United States 6 N/A Yes 106.8 (106.4, 107.3) N/A 44,330 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.2, -1.1)
Henderson County Rural Yes 57.7 (33.3, 91.6) 147 (94, 147) 4
*
*
Rusk County Urban Yes 59.8 (33.0, 99.1) 146 (76, 147) 4
*
*
Smith County Urban Yes 70.5 (53.6, 90.5) 145 (102, 147) 15
*
*
Brewster County Rural Yes 75.1 (45.6, 117.6) 144 (51, 147) 4 falling falling trend -8.2 (-31.7, -3.5)
Jefferson County Urban Yes 76.9 (63.0, 92.6) 143 (106, 146) 25 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.2)
Gregg County Urban Yes 77.5 (53.3, 107.7) 142 (66, 147) 9
*
*
Cooke County Rural Yes 77.5 (45.2, 122.9) 141 (38, 147) 4
*
*
Van Zandt County Rural Yes 78.7 (43.2, 129.4) 140 (30, 147) 4
*
*
Burnet County Rural Yes 79.0 (49.2, 118.4) 139 (46, 147) 6
*
*
Gillespie County Rural Yes 79.7 (46.5, 126.0) 138 (39, 147) 4
*
*
Milam County Rural Yes 79.9 (47.3, 125.1) 137 (37, 147) 4
*
*
Denton County Urban Yes 80.5 (71.3, 90.3) 136 (112, 144) 72 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.7, -0.3)
Winkler County Rural Yes 81.8 (45.9, 134.0) 135 (28, 147) 3 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.1, 0.4)
Erath County Rural Yes 82.9 (46.0, 134.7) 134 (22, 147) 4
*
*
Collin County Urban Yes 84.0 (74.2, 94.6) 133 (105, 143) 66 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -0.5)
Williamson County Urban Yes 84.5 (74.8, 95.0) 132 (103, 143) 67 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.2)
Presidio County Rural Yes 84.7 (56.8, 123.0) 131 (46, 147) 7 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.4, -0.9)
Kendall County Urban Yes 86.5 (58.2, 122.7) 130 (30, 147) 6 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.7, -1.3)
Titus County Rural Yes 86.6 (54.0, 129.9) 129 (30, 147) 6
*
*
Hunt County Urban Yes 88.2 (59.0, 125.3) 128 (41, 147) 7
*
*
Chambers County Urban Yes 88.7 (47.7, 146.7) 127 (12, 147) 4
*
*
Fort Bend County Urban Yes 91.2 (83.4, 99.4) 126 (99, 137) 119 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.2)
Rockwall County Urban Yes 91.9 (62.8, 128.2) 125 (33, 147) 9
*
*
Cherokee County Rural Yes 92.0 (56.8, 138.6) 124 (19, 147) 5
*
*
Waller County Urban Yes 92.3 (63.3, 128.7) 123 (36, 147) 8
*
*
Wise County Urban Yes 92.5 (59.6, 135.0) 122 (28, 147) 6
*
*
Nacogdoches County Rural Yes 94.0 (57.6, 142.0) 121 (17, 147) 5
*
*
Wood County Rural Yes 96.7 (55.4, 155.1) 120 (12, 147) 3
*
*
Bandera County Urban Yes 96.8 (59.9, 148.1) 119 (19, 147) 5
*
*
Montgomery County Urban Yes 97.7 (86.6, 109.6) 118 (79, 135) 73 stable stable trend 6.8 (-1.7, 16.1)
Johnson County Urban Yes 97.7 (78.0, 120.3) 117 (53, 143) 21
*
*
Travis County Urban Yes 98.4 (92.1, 105.0) 116 (89, 129) 224 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.5, -1.7)
Angelina County Rural Yes 98.7 (72.4, 130.7) 115 (35, 146) 11 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.9)
Bastrop County Urban Yes 99.5 (80.3, 121.5) 114 (52, 143) 23 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.0, 0.7)
Dallas County Urban Yes 102.0 (97.7, 106.3) 113 (89, 122) 560 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.8)
Fayette County Rural Yes 102.4 (59.7, 162.1) 112 (9, 147) 4
*
*
Liberty County Urban Yes 102.6 (72.7, 139.3) 111 (25, 146) 12
*
*
Andrews County Rural Yes 102.8 (67.1, 148.8) 110 (19, 147) 6
*
*
Comal County Urban Yes 103.4 (88.4, 120.1) 109 (58, 137) 37 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -0.8)
Ellis County Urban Yes 103.8 (84.8, 125.4) 108 (47, 141) 27 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 1.0)
Harris County Urban Yes 104.3 (101.4, 107.2) 107 (89, 117) 1,217 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -1.0)
Tarrant County Urban Yes 105.3 (99.7, 111.0) 106 (82, 119) 334 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -0.7)
Brazos County Urban Yes 105.4 (86.1, 127.2) 105 (48, 139) 26 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.5, 0.5)
Bell County Urban Yes 108.0 (94.5, 122.7) 104 (60, 129) 53 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.1)
McLennan County Urban Yes 108.5 (94.1, 124.2) 103 (56, 129) 46 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.6)
Gaines County Rural Yes 108.5 (70.8, 157.5) 102 (13, 147) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.9, -0.1)
Kerr County Rural Yes 109.7 (83.5, 141.0) 101 (30, 144) 13 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.3, 0.0)
Galveston County Urban Yes 110.0 (98.0, 123.0) 100 (58, 124) 68 falling falling trend -2.5 (-6.4, -1.7)
Moore County Rural Yes 110.3 (77.7, 150.9) 99 (17, 145) 9
*
*
Hockley County Urban Yes 110.6 (79.2, 149.7) 98 (19, 145) 9 stable stable trend -1.8 (-3.4, 0.3)
Austin County Urban Yes 111.0 (69.8, 164.8) 97 (9, 147) 5
*
*
Guadalupe County Urban Yes 111.0 (98.0, 125.2) 96 (53, 124) 56 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.5, -1.2)
Brown County Rural Yes 112.0 (75.9, 158.1) 95 (14, 145) 7
*
*
Wharton County Rural Yes 112.2 (87.7, 141.1) 94 (29, 142) 15 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.6)
Pecos County Rural Yes 113.0 (85.1, 147.1) 93 (23, 144) 11 stable stable trend 8.6 (-0.8, 24.1)
Washington County Rural Yes 113.4 (64.9, 180.6) 92 (6, 147) 4
*
*
Nueces County Urban Yes 113.4 (107.1, 120.0) 91 (69, 110) 249 falling falling trend -3.4 (-7.0, -1.9)
Brazoria County Urban Yes 113.7 (101.9, 126.5) 90 (55, 122) 79 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.2)
Parmer County Rural Yes 114.7 (72.1, 171.3) 89 (10, 147) 5
*
*
Jones County Urban Yes 115.7 (71.7, 175.4) 88 (7, 147) 5
*
*
Lavaca County Rural Yes 116.1 (68.2, 183.2) 87 (6, 147) 4
*
*
Hidalgo County Urban Yes 116.4 (112.6, 120.3) 86 (69, 100) 721 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.0, -0.4)
Kaufman County Urban Yes 117.4 (86.0, 154.8) 85 (14, 142) 14 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.9, 1.7)
Grayson County Urban Yes 117.8 (82.2, 161.5) 84 (13, 145) 9
*
*
Grimes County Rural Yes 118.6 (74.6, 176.7) 83 (7, 147) 5
*
*
Parker County Urban Yes 119.0 (86.4, 158.4) 82 (13, 143) 11
*
*
Scurry County Rural Yes 120.0 (77.8, 175.2) 81 (8, 147) 6
*
*
Cameron County Urban Yes 121.0 (115.7, 126.4) 80 (58, 95) 409 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.0, -0.5)
Refugio County Rural Yes 121.0 (78.1, 180.3) 79 (7, 147) 5
*
*
Castro County Rural Yes 121.4 (77.5, 180.3) 78 (5, 146) 5
*
*
Bailey County Rural Yes 121.5 (71.5, 191.1) 77 (4, 147) 4
*
*
Walker County Rural Yes 122.2 (80.3, 175.5) 76 (8, 146) 7
*
*
Navarro County Rural Yes 122.6 (86.5, 167.0) 75 (10, 143) 9
*
*
Medina County Urban Yes 122.7 (103.8, 143.9) 74 (32, 125) 32 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.2)
El Paso County Urban No 125.2 (121.4, 129.0) 73 (56, 86) 845 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -0.9)
Live Oak County Rural No 125.4 (84.0, 180.0) 72 (6, 146) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.7, 0.2)
Hays County Urban No 125.6 (111.1, 141.4) 71 (35, 109) 64 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.3)
Zapata County Rural No 126.8 (98.6, 160.4) 70 (17, 134) 14 stable stable trend 17.5 (-0.5, 32.6)
Coryell County Urban No 127.2 (90.8, 171.7) 69 (9, 143) 9
*
*
Bexar County Urban No 128.0 (124.7, 131.3) 68 (51, 82) 1,245 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -1.0)
Howard County Rural No 128.4 (97.7, 165.0) 67 (13, 137) 13 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.5)
Palo Pinto County Rural No 128.6 (77.7, 197.7) 66 (4, 147) 5
*
*
Tom Green County Urban No 128.6 (112.6, 146.2) 65 (29, 107) 49 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.3)
Goliad County Urban No 128.9 (78.8, 201.3) 64 (5, 147) 4
*
*
Matagorda County Rural No 129.2 (100.5, 163.0) 63 (13, 134) 15 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.1, 0.1)
DeWitt County Rural No 130.8 (93.7, 177.4) 62 (8, 140) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.2)
Caldwell County Urban No 131.3 (109.0, 156.6) 61 (18, 122) 26 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.2, 0.1)
Potter County Urban No 131.8 (111.9, 153.9) 60 (23, 115) 36 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.5)
Wilbarger County Rural No 133.1 (73.6, 216.7) 59 (2, 147) 3
*
*
Wilson County Urban No 133.1 (110.3, 159.2) 58 (19, 118) 26 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.7)
Starr County Rural No 133.6 (120.1, 148.2) 57 (30, 93) 72 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.7)
Midland County Urban No 134.9 (117.7, 153.6) 56 (22, 102) 53 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.8)
Maverick County Urban No 135.8 (121.5, 151.2) 55 (26, 93) 67 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.6, 0.4)
Taylor County Urban No 136.7 (115.6, 160.3) 54 (18, 108) 32 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.3)
Gonzales County Rural No 137.5 (101.1, 181.8) 53 (8, 134) 10 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.8, 0.0)
Atascosa County Urban No 137.5 (118.7, 158.3) 52 (20, 101) 40 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.1)
Mitchell County Rural No 137.9 (81.3, 217.3) 51 (2, 147) 4
*
*
Floyd County Rural No 138.9 (81.5, 219.4) 50 (3, 147) 4
*
*
Webb County Urban No 139.2 (131.8, 146.9) 49 (33, 72) 274 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.6, 0.2)
Yoakum County Rural No 139.9 (85.3, 213.8) 48 (3, 146) 5
*
*
Hale County Rural No 141.4 (114.3, 172.6) 47 (11, 114) 20 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.4)
Lampasas County Urban No 141.9 (89.0, 212.8) 46 (4, 145) 5
*
*
Val Verde County Rural No 142.0 (125.6, 159.9) 45 (20, 89) 55 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.5, 2.8)
Willacy County Rural No 142.3 (118.4, 169.5) 44 (12, 108) 25 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.6)
Ward County Rural No 142.4 (97.6, 199.5) 43 (4, 143) 7 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.1, 2.0)
Colorado County Rural No 146.8 (99.7, 207.1) 42 (3, 139) 7
*
*
Lubbock County Urban No 147.2 (134.3, 160.9) 41 (21, 71) 105 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.3)
Wichita County Urban No 147.4 (119.2, 179.7) 40 (9, 107) 21 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.4, 0.3)
Jackson County Rural No 149.3 (98.4, 215.8) 39 (3, 143) 6 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.2, 2.2)
Hill County Rural No 150.1 (101.3, 212.0) 38 (3, 138) 7
*
*
Randall County Urban No 150.4 (116.7, 189.3) 37 (5, 118) 19
*
*
Deaf Smith County Rural No 152.3 (116.1, 195.3) 36 (5, 121) 13 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.1, 0.8)
Ector County Urban No 154.1 (138.8, 170.6) 35 (13, 67) 85 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.4, 0.2)
San Patricio County Urban No 154.4 (136.4, 173.9) 34 (11, 74) 55 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.5)
Terry County Rural No 154.8 (108.0, 213.7) 33 (3, 138) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.9)
Burleson County Urban No 155.0 (94.2, 237.5) 32 (2, 145) 4
*
*
Aransas County Urban No 155.5 (115.1, 205.3) 31 (4, 123) 10 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 1.3)
Lamb County Rural No 155.6 (114.0, 206.8) 30 (3, 131) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 1.2)
Kleberg County Rural No 157.5 (133.6, 184.4) 29 (8, 85) 31 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.4)
Victoria County Urban No 159.0 (140.9, 178.6) 28 (9, 68) 58 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.9)
Polk County Rural No 162.0 (99.0, 244.8) 27 (2, 144) 5
*
*
Nolan County Rural No 162.7 (115.7, 221.8) 26 (3, 129) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.5, 1.5)
Calhoun County Rural No 162.9 (125.5, 207.5) 25 (4, 114) 14 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.0, -0.4)
Frio County Rural No 163.0 (132.7, 198.1) 24 (5, 91) 20 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.7, 1.6)
Uvalde County Rural No 166.4 (139.7, 196.8) 23 (5, 77) 28 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.4)
Sutton County Rural No 167.2 (103.6, 257.7) 22 (1, 144) 4
*
*
Robertson County Urban No 168.6 (107.6, 250.5) 21 (2, 142) 5
*
*
Bee County Rural No 169.3 (141.1, 201.3) 20 (4, 79) 26 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.8, 0.9)
Crockett County Rural No 169.8 (102.7, 265.6) 19 (2, 145) 4
*
*
Runnels County Rural No 171.6 (110.6, 252.9) 18 (2, 143) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.6, 2.1)
Reeves County Rural No 172.0 (136.6, 213.6) 17 (4, 89) 16 rising rising trend 16.3 (0.1, 28.6)
Dimmit County Rural No 172.4 (135.2, 216.9) 16 (3, 99) 15 rising rising trend 15.4 (0.5, 25.9)
Brooks County Rural No 173.3 (132.7, 222.8) 15 (3, 106) 13 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Dawson County Rural No 177.5 (131.3, 233.9) 14 (2, 111) 10 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.9, 2.1)
Karnes County Rural No 177.6 (133.9, 230.3) 13 (2, 100) 12 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.8, 1.3)
Duval County Rural No 181.1 (145.9, 222.5) 12 (3, 81) 19 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.1)
Jim Wells County Rural No 181.9 (161.9, 203.6) 11 (4, 40) 62 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.6, 0.7)
La Salle County Rural No 182.0 (131.6, 244.8) 10 (2, 107) 9 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.9, 2.1)
Zavala County Rural No 188.0 (150.0, 232.8) 9 (2, 74) 17 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.6)
Swisher County Rural No 205.3 (131.5, 303.5) 8 (1, 127) 5
*
*
Blanco County Rural No 216.1 (122.1, 348.4) 7 (1, 141) 4
*
*
McCulloch County Rural No 222.6 (149.0, 320.4) 6 (1, 107) 6
*
*
Jim Hogg County Rural No 225.9 (168.5, 297.0) 5 (1, 68) 11 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.1, 1.8)
Lynn County Urban No 227.7 (149.4, 332.0) 4 (1, 106) 6
*
*
Hudspeth County Urban No 237.8 (144.3, 365.9) 3 (1, 125) 4
*
*
Anderson County Rural No 304.3 (232.6, 389.2) 2 (1, 15) 16
*
*
Mason County Rural No 342.0 (196.7, 552.4) 1 (1, 121) 4
*
*
Archer County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Armstrong County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Baylor County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Borden County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bosque County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bowie County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Briscoe County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Callahan County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Camp County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carson County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cass County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Childress County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cochran County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coke County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coleman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Collingsworth County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Comanche County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Concho County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cottle County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crane County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crosby County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Culberson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dallam County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Delta County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dickens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Donley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Eastland County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Edwards County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Falls County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fannin County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fisher County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Foard County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Franklin County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Freestone County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Garza County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Glasscock County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gray County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hall County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hamilton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hansford County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hardeman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hardin County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harrison County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hartley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Haskell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hemphill County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hood County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hopkins County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Houston County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hutchinson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Irion County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jack County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jasper County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jeff Davis County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kenedy County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kent County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kimble County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
King County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kinney County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Knox County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lamar County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lee County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Leon County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Limestone County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lipscomb County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Llano County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Loving County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Madison County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Marion County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Martin County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
McMullen County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Menard County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mills County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Montague County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morris County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Motley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Newton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ochiltree County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oldham County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Orange County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Panola County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rains County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Reagan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Real County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Red River County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Roberts County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sabine County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
San Augustine County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
San Jacinto County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
San Saba County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Schleicher County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shackelford County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shelby County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sherman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Somervell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stephens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sterling County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stonewall County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Terrell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Throckmorton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trinity County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Tyler County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Upshur County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Upton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wheeler County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Young County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/13/2024 3:04 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.
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.
NHIA (NAACCR Hispanic Identification Algorithm) was used for Hispanic Ethnicity (see Technical Notes section of the USCS).
Statistics for minorities may be affected by inconsistent race identification between the cancer case reports (sources for numerator of rate) and data from the Census Bureau (source for denominator of rate); and from undercounts of some population groups in the census.

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