Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Alabama by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

White Non-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 descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Alabama N/A No 160.7 (159.0, 162.3) N/A 7,880 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -1.2)
United States N/A No 151.2 (151.0, 151.4) N/A 464,032 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -1.0)
Russell County Urban No 218.7 (197.6, 241.6) 1 (1, 15) 83 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Greene County Urban No 200.7 (119.3, 330.1) 2 (1, 67) 5 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.3, 3.8)
Crenshaw County Rural No 199.5 (167.3, 236.9) 3 (1, 56) 29 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.6, 1.7)
Lawrence County Urban No 197.3 (177.4, 219.1) 4 (1, 35) 75 stable stable trend -0.5 (-10.3, 5.6)
Cleburne County Rural No 192.6 (166.4, 222.2) 5 (1, 53) 40 stable stable trend 11.3 (-0.9, 20.8)
Escambia County Rural No 192.1 (171.3, 214.9) 6 (1, 45) 67 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Jackson County Rural No 190.3 (176.0, 205.6) 7 (1, 35) 140 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Franklin County Rural No 187.6 (167.7, 209.5) 8 (1, 49) 68 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Cherokee County Rural No 186.9 (167.3, 208.6) 9 (1, 46) 72 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.6)
Etowah County Urban No 186.8 (175.9, 198.4) 10 (2, 32) 231 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Walker County Urban No 186.3 (173.3, 200.2) 11 (2, 38) 160 falling falling trend -3.0 (-7.6, -1.3)
Calhoun County Urban No 186.0 (175.0, 197.6) 12 (3, 34) 227 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.2)
Covington County Rural No 185.7 (169.0, 203.9) 13 (2, 44) 97 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.0, -0.1)
Chilton County Urban No 185.2 (168.2, 203.6) 14 (2, 46) 92 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.1)
Pike County Rural No 182.1 (158.3, 208.9) 15 (1, 59) 45 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.8, 1.3)
Clarke County Rural No 181.0 (154.9, 211.1) 16 (1, 61) 38 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.2)
Clay County Rural No 180.9 (154.2, 211.7) 17 (1, 61) 34 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.2)
Talladega County Rural No 179.6 (166.3, 193.9) 18 (3, 45) 145 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.3)
Marion County Rural No 178.5 (160.9, 197.8) 19 (2, 53) 78 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Chambers County Rural No 177.0 (156.4, 200.0) 20 (2, 58) 58 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.3)
Fayette County Rural No 176.8 (151.5, 205.6) 21 (1, 62) 37 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Lamar County Rural No 174.4 (148.5, 204.2) 22 (1, 62) 34 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.5)
Barbour County Rural No 173.9 (148.8, 203.1) 23 (1, 62) 37 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.4)
Dale County Rural No 172.4 (156.3, 189.9) 24 (4, 57) 88 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.5)
Geneva County Urban No 171.3 (152.0, 192.9) 25 (3, 61) 60 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.8)
Blount County Urban No 171.3 (158.1, 185.4) 26 (7, 54) 130 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.2)
Marshall County Rural No 171.2 (160.3, 182.7) 27 (9, 52) 196 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Dallas County Rural No 170.7 (143.4, 202.9) 28 (1, 64) 33 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.2)
Coosa County Rural No 170.4 (138.4, 209.7) 29 (1, 65) 22 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.7, 0.4)
Bibb County Urban No 170.0 (147.2, 195.7) 30 (2, 63) 41 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.2)
Mobile County Urban No 169.7 (163.4, 176.2) 31 (17, 45) 577 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.0)
Pickens County Urban No 169.0 (142.2, 200.4) 32 (2, 64) 29 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.2, -0.8)
Butler County Rural No 166.4 (138.6, 199.1) 33 (2, 64) 28 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.3)
St. Clair County Urban No 166.2 (155.5, 177.6) 34 (14, 55) 185 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Tallapoosa County Rural No 166.2 (149.5, 184.6) 35 (6, 61) 84 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Elmore County Urban No 166.0 (154.1, 178.7) 36 (13, 58) 150 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Hale County Urban No 165.7 (129.0, 210.9) 37 (1, 66) 15 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.2, -0.3)
Winston County Rural No 164.5 (145.6, 185.5) 38 (6, 62) 59 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.3)
Macon County Urban No 163.9 (117.2, 226.8) 39 (1, 67) 9 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.9, 2.0)
Colbert County Urban No 163.9 (150.5, 178.3) 40 (13, 60) 116 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.6)
Henry County Urban No 163.7 (139.3, 191.9) 41 (3, 64) 35 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.2)
Conecuh County Rural No 163.6 (128.6, 207.5) 42 (1, 67) 18 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.5, 0.1)
DeKalb County Rural No 163.1 (150.9, 176.1) 43 (16, 59) 141 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Randolph County Rural No 162.5 (141.3, 186.6) 44 (5, 63) 46 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Choctaw County Rural No 160.0 (130.6, 195.7) 45 (2, 66) 21 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.1, 0.5)
Morgan County Urban No 158.0 (148.7, 167.9) 46 (24, 60) 225 falling falling trend -6.4 (-10.3, -1.5)
Jefferson County Urban No 157.0 (152.0, 162.2) 47 (33, 57) 761 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -0.9)
Lee County Urban No 156.8 (147.1, 167.0) 48 (26, 61) 202 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.6)
Montgomery County Urban No 155.9 (145.9, 166.6) 49 (26, 61) 199 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Houston County Urban No 155.9 (145.4, 167.0) 50 (26, 62) 174 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.4)
Cullman County Rural No 155.7 (145.5, 166.5) 51 (26, 62) 184 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -1.0)
Monroe County Rural No 155.1 (129.8, 185.0) 52 (5, 66) 28 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Coffee County Rural No 155.0 (140.3, 171.1) 53 (19, 63) 83 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.1)
Sumter County Rural No 153.2 (95.0, 234.4) 54 (1, 67) 6 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.6, 1.0)
Autauga County Urban No 152.8 (138.9, 167.8) 55 (23, 64) 92 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.5)
Washington County Rural No 151.0 (125.0, 181.6) 56 (6, 67) 25 falling falling trend -3.2 (-10.7, -1.2)
Lowndes County Urban No 148.6 (106.5, 210.6) 57 (1, 67) 8 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.9, -0.1)
Lauderdale County Urban No 147.5 (137.8, 157.9) 58 (37, 64) 183 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.7, -0.1)
Baldwin County Urban No 147.5 (141.4, 153.8) 59 (43, 63) 478 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.0)
Limestone County Urban No 146.9 (136.8, 157.7) 60 (37, 64) 162 falling falling trend -1.9 (-5.0, -1.0)
Madison County Urban No 146.7 (141.0, 152.6) 61 (45, 63) 521 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.1)
Wilcox County Rural No 145.3 (103.2, 205.7) 62 (1, 67) 9 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.3, 1.6)
Marengo County Rural No 130.2 (105.8, 159.9) 63 (24, 67) 21 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.1)
Tuscaloosa County Urban No 129.5 (121.8, 137.5) 64 (58, 67) 222 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.0, -2.0)
Shelby County Urban Yes 120.1 (113.8, 126.6) 65 (61, 67) 288 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.6, -1.5)
Perry County Rural Yes 119.6 (81.2, 181.0) 66 (7, 67) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.1, 1.2)
Bullock County Rural Yes 100.4 (63.5, 164.4) 67 (23, 67) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-4.7, 1.4)

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/25/2026 4:54 pm.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.

† 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 (20 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85-89, 90+).

Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI.

The US Population Data File is used with mortality data.

Φ Rural–urban county classifications are based on the 2023 USDA Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (except for Connecticut Counties which use 2013 codes). State-level cancer rates for rural areas are calculated using cancer cases registered exclusively in rural counties, while state-level cancer rates for urban areas are calculated using cases registered exclusively in urban counties.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top