Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Utah by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <65

Sorted by Count

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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Utah N/A Yes 33.6 (32.7, 34.6) N/A 941 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.4)
United States N/A Yes 45.0 (44.9, 45.1) N/A 161,722 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.9)
Salt Lake County Urban Yes 34.1 (32.6, 35.8) 14 (8, 17) 368 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.0, -1.4)
Utah County Urban Yes 31.6 (29.2, 34.0) 17 (11, 20) 140 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -0.9)
Davis County Urban Yes 31.5 (28.8, 34.4) 18 (10, 20) 98 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.2)
Weber County Urban Yes 32.3 (29.1, 35.7) 15 (9, 20) 79 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.3, -1.2)
Washington County Urban Yes 37.0 (32.7, 41.6) 11 (4, 17) 60 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.6)
Cache County Urban Yes 32.2 (27.1, 37.8) 16 (7, 20) 30 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.2)
Tooele County Urban Yes 36.2 (29.9, 43.5) 12 (3, 19) 23 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -1.0)
Box Elder County Rural Yes 35.5 (28.7, 43.5) 13 (3, 20) 20 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.6)
Iron County Rural Yes 40.6 (32.7, 49.9) 7 (1, 18) 19 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.3)
Uintah County Rural Yes 39.2 (29.9, 50.5) 8 (1, 20) 13 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.7, 0.3)
Sanpete County Rural Yes 43.7 (32.8, 57.2) 4 (1, 19) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.8)
Summit County Rural Yes 22.6 (16.8, 30.0) 21 (16, 21) 11 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.5, -1.2)
Wasatch County Rural Yes 28.3 (20.9, 37.5) 19 (7, 21) 10 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.7, -0.4)
Carbon County Rural Yes 45.8 (32.6, 62.7) 3 (1, 19) 9 stable stable trend 15.5 (-0.4, 28.3)
Sevier County Rural Yes 41.9 (29.9, 57.3) 6 (1, 20) 9 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.4, 1.1)
Duchesne County Rural Yes 43.5 (30.4, 60.3) 5 (1, 20) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.7)
Juab County Urban Yes 52.5 (34.1, 77.1) 1 (1, 19) 5
*
*
Millard County Rural Yes 38.5 (23.5, 59.3) 9 (1, 21) 4
*
*
Emery County Rural Yes 37.9 (22.6, 60.3) 10 (1, 21) 4 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.5, 1.5)
Kane County Rural Yes 47.2 (27.7, 76.4) 2 (1, 21) 4
*
*
San Juan County Rural Yes 27.3 (16.2, 43.4) 20 (4, 21) 4 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.6, 0.9)
Beaver County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Daggett County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Garfield County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grand County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morgan County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Piute County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rich County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wayne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/09/2024 6:31 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.

† 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.


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