Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for West Virginia by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by CI*Rank

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 ascending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
West Virginia N/A No 178.2 (175.8, 180.5) N/A 4,702 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.1, -1.0)
United States N/A No 146.0 (145.8, 146.2) N/A 602,955 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.6, -1.4)
Monongalia County Urban No 139.5 (129.2, 150.4) 55 (47, 55) 143 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.1)
Doddridge County Rural No 147.7 (118.3, 183.8) 54 (14, 55) 18 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.7)
Tyler County Rural No 148.3 (121.6, 180.5) 53 (15, 55) 22 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.7)
Putnam County Urban No 149.3 (137.3, 162.2) 52 (38, 55) 119 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.8, -1.3)
Grant County Rural No 155.2 (129.6, 185.2) 51 (13, 55) 29 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Hardy County Rural No 156.0 (132.8, 182.7) 50 (15, 55) 35 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Nicholas County Rural No 159.2 (141.3, 179.0) 49 (20, 55) 62 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Webster County Rural No 159.6 (130.0, 195.1) 48 (7, 55) 22 falling falling trend -5.7 (-13.5, -2.5)
Brooke County Urban No 162.5 (144.2, 183.0) 47 (17, 55) 62 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Marshall County Urban No 163.0 (146.9, 180.7) 46 (20, 55) 81 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Ohio County Urban No 163.2 (149.1, 178.5) 45 (22, 54) 109 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.1)
Preston County Urban No 164.1 (147.9, 181.7) 44 (19, 55) 79 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Upshur County Rural No 165.8 (147.0, 186.7) 43 (14, 55) 60 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Jackson County Rural No 166.4 (149.3, 185.2) 42 (16, 54) 72 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Raleigh County Urban No 166.6 (155.7, 178.1) 41 (23, 52) 186 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.5)
Wirt County Urban No 167.9 (129.0, 216.8) 40 (1, 55) 14 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Hancock County Urban No 168.6 (152.3, 186.5) 39 (15, 54) 84 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.5)
Braxton County Rural No 170.0 (145.3, 198.6) 38 (5, 55) 36 stable stable trend -1.0 (-1.9, 0.0)
Kanawha County Urban No 170.9 (163.9, 178.3) 37 (25, 48) 472 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.8, -1.3)
Ritchie County Rural No 173.7 (143.1, 210.2) 36 (3, 55) 24 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
Hampshire County Urban No 173.9 (154.8, 195.0) 35 (10, 53) 66 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Mineral County Rural No 176.3 (158.1, 196.2) 34 (8, 52) 74 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.2)
Monroe County Rural No 177.3 (151.8, 206.7) 33 (4, 54) 38 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.4)
Wayne County Urban No 177.5 (162.5, 193.8) 32 (11, 50) 108 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -1.1)
Summers County Rural No 178.3 (152.9, 207.8) 31 (4, 54) 39 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Pendleton County Rural No 179.1 (145.0, 221.1) 30 (1, 55) 22 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 0.8)
Marion County Rural No 179.5 (166.3, 193.7) 29 (12, 48) 143 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.2)
Jefferson County Urban No 180.3 (166.4, 195.1) 28 (11, 48) 132 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Randolph County Rural No 180.7 (162.8, 200.2) 27 (6, 51) 79 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Cabell County Urban No 180.7 (170.2, 191.7) 26 (12, 43) 235 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.7)
Greenbrier County Rural No 180.9 (164.8, 198.5) 25 (7, 49) 100 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.4)
Taylor County Rural No 181.8 (158.5, 208.1) 24 (4, 52) 46 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.5)
Tucker County Rural No 182.8 (148.7, 224.6) 23 (1, 55) 23 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.2)
Wood County Urban No 183.9 (173.2, 195.1) 22 (11, 41) 234 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.2)
Wyoming County Rural No 185.1 (163.4, 209.3) 21 (3, 52) 59 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.1)
Berkeley County Urban No 189.3 (178.8, 200.2) 20 (8, 35) 264 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.6)
Mercer County Rural No 190.4 (177.3, 204.3) 19 (6, 39) 172 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.3)
Pocahontas County Rural No 191.1 (157.4, 231.2) 18 (1, 54) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Harrison County Rural No 194.0 (181.5, 207.3) 17 (5, 34) 187 falling falling trend -0.9 (-3.2, -0.6)
Boone County Urban No 194.4 (172.9, 218.2) 16 (2, 46) 65 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -1.0)
Calhoun County Rural No 197.8 (160.1, 243.6) 15 (1, 54) 21 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Clay County Urban No 200.3 (166.0, 240.7) 14 (1, 53) 25 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.6)
Mason County Rural No 201.1 (181.5, 222.6) 13 (2, 38) 81 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Morgan County Urban No 202.3 (178.5, 228.9) 12 (1, 42) 58 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.3)
Barbour County Rural No 202.4 (175.8, 232.3) 11 (1, 46) 45 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Wetzel County Rural No 203.3 (177.9, 231.9) 10 (1, 42) 49 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.5)
McDowell County Rural No 204.2 (181.7, 229.3) 9 (1, 39) 64 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Fayette County Urban No 205.2 (189.3, 222.3) 8 (2, 28) 132 falling falling trend -0.5 (-0.8, -0.2)
Gilmer County Rural No 210.5 (171.6, 256.7) 7 (1, 50) 21 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.0, 0.9)
Logan County Rural No 210.8 (192.3, 230.8) 6 (1, 29) 104 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.6)
Lewis County Rural No 211.6 (186.4, 239.6) 5 (1, 36) 54 stable stable trend -0.5 (-0.9, 0.0)
Mingo County Rural No 212.5 (189.8, 237.5) 4 (1, 31) 69 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.1, -0.3)
Pleasants County Rural No 213.1 (174.8, 258.2) 3 (1, 49) 23 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.2)
Roane County Rural No 220.9 (192.4, 253.0) 2 (1, 33) 48 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.8, 0.4)
Lincoln County Rural No 240.2 (214.7, 268.2) 1 (1, 13) 70 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.3)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/22/2024 4:07 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.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.


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