Return to Home Mortality > Table > Data Table

Data Table for Rate/Trend Comparison by Cancer

Death Rate/Trend Comparison by Cancer, 2012-2016

Utah Counties versus United States

All Cancer Sites

All Races, Both Sexes

Counties
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Priority Index1
1=highest
9=lowest

 sort by priority index descending
Recent Trend2
County Death
Rate
Compared
to
US Rate
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Age-Adjusted Death Rate

deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate descending
Rate
Ratio3
County
to
US
 sort by rate descending
Recent 5-Year Trend2 in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
United States - falling falling trend - 590,623 161.0 (160.8, 161.1) - -1.5 (-1.6, -1.5)
Utah - falling falling trend - 3,021 127.0 (125.0, 129.1) - -1.1 (-1.2, -0.9)
Beaver County 6 stable stable trend similar 12 188.7 (143.8, 243.2) 1.2 -0.7 (-2.1, 0.7)
Carbon County 6 stable stable trend similar 39 161.0 (138.7, 186.1) 1.0 -0.6 (-1.5, 0.4)
Duchesne County 6 stable stable trend similar 25 149.2 (124.0, 177.8) 0.9 -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Iron County 6 stable stable trend similar 59 147.1 (130.4, 165.3) 0.9 -0.6 (-1.6, 0.4)
Kane County 6 stable stable trend similar 15 141.0 (110.0, 179.2) 0.9 -1.3 (-3.1, 0.4)
San Juan County 6 stable stable trend similar 19 138.0 (111.6, 168.8) 0.9 -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Wayne County 6 stable stable trend similar 5 136.4 (85.4, 209.1) 0.8 -1.1 (-3.4, 1.3)
Juab County 7 stable stable trend lower 9 100.4 (73.0, 134.4) 0.6 -1.5 (-3.3, 0.2)
Millard County 7 stable stable trend lower 20 129.4 (104.5, 158.6) 0.8 -0.5 (-1.9, 0.9)
Sevier County 7 stable stable trend lower 33 137.3 (116.9, 160.4) 0.9 -0.5 (-1.5, 0.5)
Grand County 8 falling falling trend similar 20 170.4 (137.7, 208.9) 1.1 -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Box Elder County 9 falling falling trend lower 61 125.1 (111.4, 140.0) 0.8 -0.9 (-1.7, 0.0)
Cache County 9 falling falling trend lower 90 109.6 (99.6, 120.2) 0.7 -1.0 (-1.6, -0.4)
Davis County 9 falling falling trend lower 297 120.0 (113.9, 126.4) 0.7 -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7)
Emery County 9 falling falling trend lower 14 113.1 (87.6, 144.1) 0.7 -2.0 (-3.6, -0.4)
Garfield County 9 falling falling trend lower 7 101.4 (68.9, 145.1) 0.6 -2.3 (-4.2, -0.4)
Morgan County 9 falling falling trend lower 9 106.5 (77.7, 142.2) 0.7 -2.4 (-3.7, -1.0)
Salt Lake County 9 falling falling trend lower 1,172 133.1 (129.6, 136.6) 0.8 -1.1 (-1.3, -0.8)
Sanpete County 9 falling falling trend lower 34 127.5 (108.9, 148.4) 0.8 -1.2 (-2.2, -0.3)
Summit County 9 falling falling trend lower 31 97.3 (80.7, 116.1) 0.6 -1.6 (-2.8, -0.3)
Tooele County 9 falling falling trend lower 60 135.3 (120.0, 152.0) 0.8 -1.4 (-2.1, -0.6)
Uintah County 9 falling falling trend lower 35 125.1 (107.0, 145.3) 0.8 -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Utah County 9 falling falling trend lower 395 120.5 (115.2, 126.0) 0.7 -0.7 (-1.0, -0.4)
Wasatch County 9 falling falling trend lower 25 117.7 (97.0, 141.2) 0.7 -1.3 (-2.5, -0.1)
Washington County 9 falling falling trend lower 239 117.5 (110.7, 124.7) 0.7 -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Weber County 9 falling falling trend lower 285 132.7 (125.8, 139.9) 0.8 -0.9 (-1.3, -0.6)
Rich County
**
** similar 3 109.6 (60.8, 184.5) 0.7
**
Daggett County
**
**
*
3 or fewer
*
*
**
Piute County
**
**
*
3 or fewer
*
*
**
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/30/2020 10:53 pm.

Trend2
     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.
Rate Comparison
     Above     when 95% confident the rate is above and Rate Ratio3 > 1.10
     Similar     when unable to conclude above or below with confidence.
     Below     when 95% confident the rate is below and Rate Ratio3 < 0.90

* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate and trend estimates.
** Data are too sparse to provide stable estimates of annual rates needed to calculate trend.
1 Priority indices were created by ordering from rates that are rising and above the comparison rate to rates that are falling and below the comparison rate.
2 Recent trend in death rates is usually an Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) based on the APCs calculated by Joinpoint Version 4.7.0.0. Due to data availability issues, the time period and/or calculation method used in the calculation of the trends may differ for selected geographic areas.
3 Rate ratio is the county rate divided by the US rate. Previous versions of this table used one-year rates for states and five-year rates for counties. As of June 2018, only five-year rates are used.
Source: 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 2020 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 1969-2016 US Population Data File is used with mortality data.
Note: When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate. Suppression is used to avoid misinterpretation when rates are unstable.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data. Data presented on the State Cancer Profiles Web Site may differ from statistics reported by the State Cancer Registries (for more information).

Data for the following has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate and trend estimates:
Daggett County, Piute County

Trend for the following could not be reliably determined due to small number of deaths per year:
Rich County


Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top