Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Iowa by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

Sorted by Recentaapc

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
Iowa N/A No 128.1 (126.0, 130.3) N/A 2,949 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -1.1)
United States N/A No 126.3 (126.1, 126.6) N/A 287,034 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.2, -1.0)
Montgomery County Rural No 128.2 (94.5, 171.8) 50 (1, 98) 11 falling falling trend -21.5 (-33.3, -14.2)
Decatur County Rural Yes 104.2 (71.3, 150.3) 88 (5, 99) 6 falling falling trend -9.8 (-34.9, -2.7)
Emmet County Rural No 123.2 (89.5, 167.7) 61 (2, 99) 10 falling falling trend -7.9 (-33.2, -0.6)
Guthrie County Urban Yes 102.7 (74.8, 139.9) 91 (15, 99) 10 falling falling trend -7.9 (-24.4, -1.3)
Warren County Urban Yes 116.1 (100.6, 133.6) 73 (27, 94) 41 falling falling trend -2.9 (-12.2, -1.0)
Adams County Rural Yes 100.4 (53.9, 178.0) 92 (1, 99) 3 stable stable trend -2.5 (-5.7, 0.5)
Hancock County Rural Yes 104.3 (74.8, 143.3) 87 (10, 99) 10 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.4, -0.8)
Johnson County Urban Yes 99.5 (89.9, 109.9) 93 (68, 98) 82 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.7)
O'Brien County Rural No 129.6 (99.5, 167.0) 48 (2, 97) 15 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.1, -0.2)
Clay County Rural Yes 97.8 (75.3, 126.1) 94 (31, 99) 14 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.7, -0.4)
Shelby County Rural Yes 93.0 (68.0, 126.1) 97 (30, 99) 10 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.4, 0.0)
Butler County Rural Yes 115.7 (88.5, 149.8) 74 (8, 99) 14 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.8, -0.2)
Cedar County Rural Yes 103.4 (81.5, 130.5) 89 (25, 99) 16 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.7, -0.3)
Fayette County Rural Yes 108.9 (86.0, 136.9) 83 (17, 99) 19 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.9, -0.1)
Poweshiek County Rural Yes 105.2 (83.8, 131.7) 85 (26, 99) 17 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.4)
Audubon County Rural Yes 117.5 (77.1, 176.0) 70 (1, 99) 6 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.4, 0.5)
Dickinson County Rural Yes 112.5 (90.1, 140.2) 78 (16, 98) 21 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.6)
Mills County Urban No 136.6 (105.9, 174.4) 36 (1, 95) 14 stable stable trend -1.8 (-3.7, 0.0)
Osceola County Rural No 132.4 (90.0, 191.7) 43 (1, 99) 7 stable stable trend -1.8 (-6.7, 0.7)
Dallas County Urban Yes 95.9 (84.8, 108.2) 95 (68, 99) 55 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.4, -1.0)
Sioux County Rural Yes 75.2 (60.2, 93.2) 99 (81, 99) 19 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.5, 0.1)
Jones County Urban Yes 112.0 (89.1, 140.0) 79 (15, 98) 18 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.0)
Louisa County Rural No 160.1 (121.8, 208.2) 6 (1, 88) 13 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.3, 0.8)
Marshall County Rural No 131.1 (113.1, 151.5) 44 (8, 87) 39 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.3)
Monona County Rural No 123.1 (90.3, 166.9) 62 (2, 99) 10 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.8, 0.4)
Wright County Rural No 130.0 (98.7, 169.2) 47 (2, 97) 13 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.9, 0.2)
Carroll County Rural Yes 108.4 (87.2, 134.1) 84 (25, 99) 20 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.6, 0.5)
Harrison County Urban No 129.3 (100.6, 164.7) 49 (2, 97) 15 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.2, 0.0)
Ida County Rural No 138.7 (100.2, 190.7) 32 (1, 98) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.8, 0.6)
Iowa County Rural Yes 117.5 (92.0, 149.0) 71 (10, 98) 15 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.2, 0.1)
Plymouth County Rural Yes 111.0 (90.6, 135.2) 80 (22, 99) 22 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.2)
Winneshiek County Rural Yes 104.6 (82.7, 131.7) 86 (23, 99) 18 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.0)
Crawford County Rural Yes 118.6 (90.9, 152.7) 69 (6, 98) 13 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.3)
Hardin County Rural No 132.9 (106.5, 165.2) 42 (2, 94) 20 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.0, 0.0)
Linn County Urban No 122.9 (115.2, 131.1) 63 (36, 79) 196 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -0.9)
Madison County Urban No 124.4 (96.9, 158.1) 58 (4, 97) 14 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.4)
Muscatine County Rural No 136.0 (117.6, 156.6) 37 (5, 81) 41 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.8, -0.2)
Black Hawk County Urban No 126.6 (116.0, 137.9) 53 (23, 79) 114 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.6)
Davis County Rural Yes 113.3 (75.6, 163.8) 77 (2, 99) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.7, 1.0)
Hamilton County Rural Yes 119.4 (92.6, 152.9) 68 (4, 98) 14 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.2, 0.4)
Lucas County Rural No 133.3 (96.6, 181.9) 41 (1, 98) 9 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.4, 0.6)
Pocahontas County Rural No 126.2 (89.0, 177.4) 55 (1, 99) 8 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.0, 0.3)
Scott County Urban No 130.7 (121.7, 140.4) 45 (21, 70) 160 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.7)
Taylor County Rural Yes 87.8 (54.5, 138.6) 98 (11, 99) 4 stable stable trend -1.3 (-5.1, 2.0)
Winnebago County Rural Yes 109.3 (81.3, 146.3) 82 (7, 99) 11 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.0, 0.4)
Cerro Gordo County Rural Yes 119.9 (103.8, 138.2) 65 (21, 93) 47 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.5, -0.1)
Page County Rural No 130.1 (103.2, 163.6) 46 (3, 96) 18 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.4, -0.1)
Webster County Rural No 128.0 (109.4, 149.3) 51 (10, 90) 37 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.1)
Dubuque County Urban No 126.8 (115.2, 139.4) 52 (20, 81) 97 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.4)
Kossuth County Rural Yes 109.6 (82.8, 143.6) 81 (9, 99) 14 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.1, 0.6)
Sac County Rural No 143.5 (108.1, 189.0) 23 (1, 96) 13 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.8, 0.4)
Union County Rural Yes 119.9 (90.1, 157.7) 66 (3, 99) 11 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.4, 1.1)
Allamakee County Rural No 150.5 (118.3, 190.1) 14 (1, 88) 17 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.3, 1.1)
Buena Vista County Rural Yes 114.6 (89.3, 145.1) 75 (9, 98) 15 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.8, 0.7)
Chickasaw County Rural No 140.0 (104.8, 184.3) 30 (1, 97) 12 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.8, 0.7)
Polk County Urban No 137.4 (131.3, 143.7) 34 (18, 54) 395 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Worth County Rural Yes 119.8 (82.6, 171.0) 67 (2, 99) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.3, 1.1)
Lee County Rural No 143.2 (122.8, 166.5) 24 (3, 77) 39 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.5)
Pottawattamie County Urban No 145.6 (132.8, 159.5) 21 (6, 57) 100 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.3)
Boone County Urban No 134.0 (111.6, 160.2) 40 (3, 90) 27 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Clinton County Rural No 141.8 (124.8, 160.9) 26 (5, 74) 53 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.2)
Henry County Rural No 143.5 (117.4, 174.6) 22 (1, 88) 22 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.4, 0.8)
Jasper County Urban No 140.4 (120.7, 162.8) 28 (3, 80) 40 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.2)
Ringgold County Rural No 151.4 (100.2, 225.0) 13 (1, 99) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.0, 2.1)
Story County Urban Yes 117.5 (104.2, 132.2) 72 (30, 91) 60 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Benton County Urban No 123.3 (101.6, 148.8) 60 (9, 95) 24 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.1, 0.7)
Clayton County Rural No 157.1 (126.8, 193.3) 7 (1, 79) 22 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 0.9)
Delaware County Rural Yes 120.4 (96.2, 150.0) 64 (7, 98) 18 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.4, 1.0)
Clarke County Rural No 148.0 (108.3, 198.7) 17 (1, 96) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.3, 2.0)
Cherokee County Rural No 137.1 (107.7, 174.5) 35 (1, 94) 16 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.8)
Des Moines County Rural No 146.5 (127.2, 168.2) 18 (2, 70) 45 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.1, 0.9)
Jackson County Rural No 126.4 (101.7, 156.1) 54 (5, 96) 20 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 0.7)
Lyon County Rural Yes 95.7 (68.3, 131.7) 96 (16, 99) 9 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.9, 1.9)
Mitchell County Rural No 140.3 (107.8, 181.6) 29 (1, 94) 14 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.8, 2.1)
Tama County Rural No 155.2 (124.0, 192.5) 9 (1, 81) 19 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.0, 0.9)
Adair County Rural No 151.5 (109.3, 207.2) 12 (1, 96) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.0)
Calhoun County Rural Yes 114.2 (84.6, 153.7) 76 (5, 99) 11 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.0, 2.0)
Jefferson County Rural No 155.0 (124.4, 192.2) 10 (1, 83) 21 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.9, 1.3)
Woodbury County Urban No 156.7 (143.2, 171.2) 8 (2, 40) 103 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.6)
Bremer County Urban Yes 103.2 (82.7, 127.7) 90 (28, 99) 19 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.1)
Buchanan County Rural No 145.9 (119.1, 177.6) 20 (1, 84) 21 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.1, 1.6)
Greene County Rural No 141.9 (105.4, 189.7) 25 (1, 97) 12 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.4, 2.0)
Monroe County Rural No 125.4 (87.6, 176.5) 57 (1, 99) 7 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.5, 2.1)
Wayne County Rural No 124.4 (84.2, 180.3) 59 (1, 99) 7 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.3, 2.1)
Keokuk County Rural No 135.3 (99.2, 181.9) 38 (1, 98) 10 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.3, 2.3)
Wapello County Rural No 162.6 (140.8, 187.1) 4 (1, 53) 42 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.2, 1.1)
Howard County Rural No 160.2 (121.6, 209.2) 5 (1, 87) 12 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.5, 1.9)
Washington County Urban No 134.4 (110.6, 162.4) 39 (4, 91) 24 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.5)
Floyd County Rural No 137.8 (109.3, 172.5) 33 (1, 93) 18 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.4, 2.0)
Mahaska County Rural No 164.9 (137.7, 196.5) 3 (1, 63) 28 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.8, 1.7)
Marion County Rural No 141.5 (121.2, 164.6) 27 (3, 79) 37 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.8, 1.7)
Grundy County Urban No 139.7 (107.5, 179.8) 31 (1, 94) 14 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.4, 2.7)
Appanoose County Rural No 152.3 (120.4, 191.8) 11 (1, 86) 17 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.5, 2.9)
Van Buren County Rural No 170.6 (122.8, 233.0) 2 (1, 93) 9 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.0, 3.2)
Franklin County Rural No 149.2 (113.1, 195.2) 15 (1, 95) 12 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.0, 3.2)
Fremont County Rural No 146.3 (102.6, 205.8) 19 (1, 99) 8 stable stable trend 1.2 (-2.0, 16.0)
Palo Alto County Rural No 182.4 (138.3, 237.8) 1 (1, 75) 13 stable stable trend 1.2 (-1.2, 3.7)
Humboldt County Rural No 126.1 (91.3, 171.5) 56 (1, 99) 9 stable stable trend 3.1 (-0.5, 17.7)
Cass County Rural No 149.1 (117.9, 187.5) 16 (1, 89) 18 stable stable trend 3.7 (-4.4, 13.6)

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/21/2026 3:22 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 (20 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85-89, 90+).

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.

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.

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

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