Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Alabama by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

Black Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, 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
Alabama N/A No 169.8 (166.7, 173.0) N/A 2,377 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.6, -2.0)
United States N/A No 166.5 (165.9, 167.1) N/A 70,844 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.0, -1.9)
Tallapoosa County Rural No 169.8 (139.1, 205.7) 34 (6, 58) 22 falling falling trend -14.6 (-22.7, -1.7)
Dallas County Rural No 152.4 (132.9, 174.0) 45 (19, 58) 47 falling falling trend -13.7 (-28.0, -1.2)
Covington County Rural No 172.6 (127.2, 229.6) 31 (2, 60) 10 falling falling trend -12.0 (-28.5, -2.1)
Baldwin County Urban No 148.7 (125.0, 175.5) 48 (16, 60) 30 falling falling trend -10.1 (-22.3, -3.3)
Washington County Rural No 158.6 (107.1, 226.9) 42 (3, 60) 6 falling falling trend -9.5 (-21.2, -4.3)
Monroe County Rural No 162.7 (128.7, 203.3) 38 (6, 59) 17 falling falling trend -4.6 (-19.8, -1.1)
Coffee County Rural No 152.2 (119.4, 191.5) 46 (8, 60) 15 falling falling trend -4.3 (-5.5, -3.2)
St. Clair County Urban No 135.9 (97.7, 183.4) 55 (8, 60) 11 falling falling trend -3.6 (-6.4, -0.9)
Jackson County Rural No 126.8 (72.0, 210.1) 59 (5, 60) 3 falling falling trend -3.4 (-7.1, -0.2)
Morgan County Urban No 142.3 (116.0, 172.8) 53 (17, 60) 23 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.5, -1.3)
Perry County Rural No 151.2 (112.1, 200.0) 47 (6, 60) 10 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.9, -1.2)
Randolph County Rural No 144.6 (101.4, 201.0) 52 (6, 60) 7 falling falling trend -2.9 (-5.4, -0.7)
Madison County Urban No 147.0 (135.2, 159.5) 50 (33, 57) 129 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.6, -1.8)
Dale County Rural No 161.8 (126.3, 204.1) 40 (6, 59) 16 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.3, -1.1)
Calhoun County Urban No 157.9 (135.6, 182.8) 44 (13, 58) 39 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.3, -1.4)
Pickens County Urban No 196.6 (157.7, 242.7) 11 (2, 53) 19 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.9, -1.1)
Jefferson County Urban No 170.8 (164.1, 177.8) 33 (19, 43) 531 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.1, -2.0)
Lauderdale County Urban No 145.4 (112.7, 184.7) 51 (12, 60) 14 falling falling trend -2.3 (-4.4, -0.5)
Marengo County Rural No 148.1 (119.0, 182.6) 49 (12, 60) 19 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.6, -1.2)
Coosa County Rural No 139.9 (92.8, 205.6) 54 (6, 60) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.2, -0.4)
Etowah County Urban No 179.1 (150.5, 211.6) 24 (5, 54) 31 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.3)
Mobile County Urban No 177.8 (168.1, 187.9) 25 (13, 40) 276 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.6)
Shelby County Urban No 135.2 (111.1, 162.6) 56 (25, 60) 29 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.0, 0.1)
Tuscaloosa County Urban No 159.1 (144.7, 174.5) 41 (19, 54) 101 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.4)
Houston County Urban No 180.2 (157.6, 205.1) 22 (6, 51) 50 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.1, -0.9)
Limestone County Urban Yes 118.0 (92.5, 148.2) 60 (37, 60) 17 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.0, 0.3)
Macon County Urban No 171.8 (146.5, 200.7) 32 (7, 55) 36 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.1, -1.0)
Montgomery County Urban No 176.8 (166.3, 187.8) 26 (13, 42) 230 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.5)
Autauga County Urban No 174.7 (140.9, 214.0) 29 (4, 57) 20 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.1, 0.6)
Lawrence County Urban No 132.6 (93.3, 186.2) 58 (9, 60) 7 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.2, 0.7)
Butler County Rural No 181.3 (145.5, 223.5) 20 (3, 57) 18 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.2, -0.1)
Chambers County Rural No 164.8 (137.3, 196.3) 37 (8, 58) 27 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.0, -0.1)
Chilton County Urban No 210.1 (154.2, 279.8) 8 (1, 57) 10 stable stable trend -1.5 (-4.0, 0.9)
Colbert County Urban No 183.4 (149.4, 223.2) 19 (3, 55) 21 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.0, -0.1)
Elmore County Urban No 198.5 (165.5, 235.8) 9 (2, 49) 30 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.3)
Hale County Urban No 196.2 (159.8, 238.9) 12 (2, 52) 21 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.4)
Bullock County Rural No 175.2 (138.0, 219.9) 28 (3, 58) 16 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.1, 0.3)
Choctaw County Rural No 161.9 (123.0, 210.8) 39 (6, 60) 13 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.5, 0.9)
Russell County Urban No 191.1 (167.2, 217.4) 15 (4, 46) 50 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.5)
Walker County Urban No 158.5 (106.9, 226.3) 43 (3, 60) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.1, 1.3)
Pike County Rural No 185.7 (150.2, 226.8) 17 (3, 55) 20 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.3)
Talladega County Rural No 175.6 (153.6, 199.9) 27 (7, 51) 51 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Fayette County Rural No 133.2 (75.9, 219.8) 57 (3, 60) 3 stable stable trend -1.1 (-4.9, 2.4)
Lowndes County Urban No 173.9 (137.6, 217.6) 30 (4, 58) 17 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.9, 0.7)
Escambia County Rural No 220.7 (185.1, 261.4) 6 (1, 37) 27 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 1.1)
Barbour County Rural No 197.9 (165.0, 235.7) 10 (3, 48) 26 stable stable trend -0.4 (-17.9, 12.9)
Bibb County Urban No 168.5 (117.2, 234.7) 35 (2, 60) 7 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.4, 2.7)
Clarke County Rural No 248.0 (209.0, 292.5) 3 (1, 19) 30 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.6)
Henry County Urban No 185.0 (139.3, 242.5) 18 (2, 59) 12 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.6, 1.8)
Conecuh County Rural No 191.7 (146.3, 247.6) 14 (2, 57) 13 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.2, 1.8)
Wilcox County Rural No 185.7 (146.1, 233.0) 16 (2, 57) 16 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.3, 1.9)
Sumter County Rural No 165.3 (130.9, 206.7) 36 (5, 59) 18 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.3, 2.3)
Geneva County Urban No 240.6 (165.9, 338.0) 4 (1, 57) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.0, 2.3)
Crenshaw County Rural No 240.1 (175.0, 322.6) 5 (1, 51) 10 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.6, 3.4)
Greene County Urban No 179.6 (140.1, 227.7) 23 (3, 58) 16 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.6, 4.5)
Lee County Urban No 195.1 (173.2, 218.9) 13 (4, 40) 67 stable stable trend 2.0 (-1.5, 8.8)
DeKalb County Rural No 218.1 (123.8, 358.7) 7 (1, 60) 3
*
*
Franklin County Rural No 180.8 (102.4, 300.4) 21 (1, 60) 3
*
*
Marion County Rural No 278.8 (168.1, 437.6) 2 (1, 59) 4
*
*
Marshall County Rural No 292.4 (179.2, 443.8) 1 (1, 57) 5
*
*
Blount County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cherokee County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cleburne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cullman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lamar County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Winston County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/21/2026 10:13 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 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).

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top