Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Utah by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Name
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 25.1?
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
Utah N/A Yes 15.6 (14.9, 16.2) N/A 447 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.5, -2.3)
United States N/A No 32.4 (32.3, 32.5) N/A 136,831 falling falling trend -4.3 (-4.4, -4.1)
Weber County Urban Yes 19.2 (16.8, 21.9) 7 (3, 10) 48 falling falling trend -3.1 (-10.0, -1.6)
Washington County Urban Yes 16.1 (14.1, 18.4) 9 (6, 14) 47 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.9, -1.5)
Wasatch County Rural Yes 11.9 (7.1, 18.6) 15 (6, 18) 4
*
*
Utah County Urban Yes 11.0 (9.5, 12.5) 16 (13, 18) 44 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.3)
Uintah County Rural Yes 17.8 (11.8, 25.7) 8 (2, 17) 6 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.5, -0.6)
Tooele County Urban Yes 23.1 (17.5, 29.8) 4 (1, 10) 12 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.6, -1.2)
Summit County Rural Yes 12.1 (7.4, 18.4) 14 (6, 18) 5
*
*
Sevier County Rural Yes 19.7 (12.7, 29.4) 6 (1, 17) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.9, 0.7)
Sanpete County Rural Yes 10.9 (6.3, 17.7) 17 (7, 18) 3 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.5, 0.8)
Salt Lake County Urban Yes 15.9 (14.8, 17.0) 11 (7, 14) 162 falling falling trend -5.2 (-10.5, -2.9)
Iron County Rural Yes 16.1 (11.6, 21.7) 10 (4, 17) 9 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.9, -0.5)
Grand County Rural Yes 21.5 (12.1, 36.7) 5 (1, 18) 3 falling falling trend -3.0 (-5.1, -0.9)
Emery County Rural No 29.8 (17.7, 47.6) 2 (1, 13) 4
*
*
Duchesne County Rural No 27.2 (17.6, 40.0) 3 (1, 13) 5
*
*
Davis County Urban Yes 14.6 (12.7, 16.7) 13 (7, 15) 43 falling falling trend -2.6 (-5.6, -1.7)
Carbon County Rural No 30.0 (20.9, 42.0) 1 (1, 8) 7 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.6, 1.7)
Cache County Urban Yes 9.9 (7.3, 13.0) 18 (13, 18) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 1.1)
Box Elder County Rural Yes 15.5 (11.3, 20.8) 12 (4, 17) 9 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.8)
Beaver County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Daggett County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Garfield County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Juab County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kane County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Millard County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morgan County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Piute County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rich County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
San Juan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wayne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/04/2024 10:04 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.

Healthy People 2030 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

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