Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Arkansas by County

Thyroid (All Stages^), 2017-2021

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

Sorted by Rate

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate ascending
CI*Rank
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by CI rank descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Arkansas 6 N/A 10.9 (10.4, 11.4) N/A 347 falling falling trend -3.5 (-9.0, -0.3)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 12.9 (12.9, 13.0) N/A 44,379 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.9)
Franklin County 6 Rural 20.7 (12.4, 32.7) 1 (1, 20) 4
*
*
Lonoke County 6 Urban 15.5 (11.8, 20.1) 2 (1, 18) 12 stable stable trend 3.6 (-0.4, 8.8)
Van Buren County 6 Rural 15.2 (8.1, 26.4) 3 (1, 23) 3
*
*
Saline County 6 Urban 14.8 (11.9, 18.1) 4 (1, 17) 20 rising rising trend 4.8 (2.2, 8.2)
Cleburne County 6 Rural 14.8 (8.6, 23.7) 5 (1, 23) 4
*
*
Pope County 6 Rural 14.3 (10.4, 19.1) 6 (1, 20) 10 stable stable trend 2.3 (-0.8, 6.1)
Craighead County 6 Urban 14.0 (10.9, 17.6) 7 (1, 19) 15 rising rising trend 3.6 (0.1, 8.2)
Sebastian County 6 Urban 13.2 (10.6, 16.3) 8 (2, 20) 18 rising rising trend 4.9 (1.3, 9.7)
Hot Spring County 6 Rural 13.1 (8.2, 20.1) 9 (1, 23) 5 rising rising trend 5.5 (1.8, 10.2)
Greene County 6 Rural 12.8 (8.7, 18.3) 10 (1, 23) 6 stable stable trend 4.0 (0.0, 9.3)
Garland County 6 Urban 12.8 (9.7, 16.5) 11 (2, 21) 14 rising rising trend 4.1 (0.6, 8.2)
White County 6 Rural 12.6 (9.3, 16.8) 12 (2, 22) 10 stable stable trend -15.4 (-31.6, 4.2)
Crawford County 6 Urban 12.6 (9.0, 17.3) 13 (1, 22) 8 rising rising trend 7.6 (4.0, 12.6)
Mississippi County 6 Rural 12.6 (8.2, 18.4) 14 (1, 23) 5
*
*
Boone County 6 Rural 12.2 (7.6, 18.6) 15 (1, 23) 5 stable stable trend 1.9 (-3.2, 8.0)
Benton County 6 Urban 11.5 (9.8, 13.5) 16 (6, 21) 33 stable stable trend -5.1 (-18.9, 2.6)
Washington County 6 Urban 11.2 (9.4, 13.4) 17 (6, 22) 26 stable stable trend -8.8 (-25.9, 3.8)
Carroll County 6 Rural 10.8 (5.9, 18.1) 18 (2, 23) 3
*
*
Union County 6 Rural 10.7 (6.7, 16.3) 19 (2, 23) 5
*
*
Faulkner County 6 Urban 10.0 (7.5, 12.9) 20 (8, 23) 12 stable stable trend 0.6 (-3.5, 5.4)
Pulaski County 6 Urban 9.7 (8.3, 11.1) 21 (13, 23) 41 falling falling trend -7.5 (-19.5, -2.1)
Independence County 6 Rural 8.3 (4.6, 13.6) 22 (6, 23) 3 stable stable trend -3.4 (-10.5, 0.6)
Jefferson County 6 Rural 7.6 (5.0, 11.2) 23 (13, 23) 6
*
*
Arkansas County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ashley County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Baxter County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bradley County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Calhoun County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chicot County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cleveland County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Columbia County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Conway County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crittenden County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cross County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dallas County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Desha County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Drew County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fulton County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hempstead County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Howard County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Izard County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jackson County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Johnson County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lafayette County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lawrence County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lee County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lincoln County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Little River County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Logan County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Madison County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Marion County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Miller County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Monroe County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Montgomery County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Nevada County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Newton County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ouachita County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Phillips County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pike County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Poinsett County 6 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Polk County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Prairie County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Randolph County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scott County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Searcy County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sevier County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sharp County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
St. Francis County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stone County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Woodruff County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Yell County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/09/2024 5:18 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.

† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.
‡ Incidence data come from different sources. 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.

Rates and trends are computed using different standards for malignancy. For more information see malignant.html.

^ All Stages refers to any stage in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Summary/Historic Combined Summary Stage (2004+).
⋔ 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).
1 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2023 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2023 submission).
8 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. AAPCs are calculated by the Joinpoint Regression Program and are based on APCs. Data are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2023 data.

Data for the United States does not include data from Indiana.
Data for the 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