Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Alabama by County

Colon & Rectum, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Count
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 8.9?
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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Alabama No 14.7 (14.3, 15.1) N/A 902 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.5, -1.5)
United States No 13.1 (13.1, 13.2) N/A 52,152 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.1, -1.8)
Jefferson County No 13.7 (12.6, 14.9) 45 (27, 53) 111 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.5)
Mobile County No 14.5 (13.0, 16.1) 38 (20, 51) 72 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.2)
Madison County No 13.1 (11.6, 14.8) 51 (27, 57) 56 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.2)
Montgomery County No 15.0 (12.9, 17.3) 33 (16, 52) 39 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Baldwin County No 12.0 (10.3, 13.9) 54 (33, 59) 38 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.5, -1.8)
Tuscaloosa County No 13.6 (11.5, 16.0) 46 (21, 57) 30 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.7, -0.8)
Shelby County No 11.6 (9.7, 13.7) 56 (34, 59) 29 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.2, -1.1)
Calhoun County No 17.2 (14.3, 20.6) 24 (7, 48) 26 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.5)
Etowah County No 15.0 (12.2, 18.3) 32 (12, 56) 21 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.1)
Lee County No 13.9 (11.3, 16.8) 44 (17, 58) 21 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Morgan County No 13.4 (10.8, 16.3) 47 (19, 58) 20 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Talladega County No 19.0 (15.4, 23.2) 15 (3, 44) 20 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Houston County No 14.3 (11.5, 17.6) 39 (14, 57) 19 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.4)
Lauderdale County No 13.9 (11.1, 17.2) 42 (15, 58) 18 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.2)
Walker County No 19.8 (15.6, 24.9) 12 (2, 44) 16 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.1)
Marshall County No 13.1 (10.3, 16.5) 49 (17, 59) 16 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.1)
St. Clair County No 14.2 (11.0, 17.9) 41 (12, 58) 15 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.6, -0.1)
Elmore County No 15.4 (12.0, 19.4) 30 (9, 57) 15 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.3)
Jackson County No 20.5 (16.0, 26.1) 10 (2, 43) 15 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.7, 1.0)
Cullman County No 12.7 (9.8, 16.2) 53 (20, 59) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Colbert County No 17.7 (13.7, 22.7) 20 (4, 54) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Limestone County No 11.6 (8.9, 14.8) 55 (24, 59) 13 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.0, -0.5)
Russell County No 19.0 (14.4, 24.6) 14 (2, 51) 12 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Dallas County No 24.4 (18.3, 31.9) 4 (1, 34) 12 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.5)
DeKalb County No 13.1 (9.9, 17.1) 50 (16, 59) 12 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.4, 2.4)
Blount County No 14.8 (11.2, 19.3) 35 (9, 58) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.0, -0.8)
Marion County No 22.3 (16.5, 29.9) 6 (1, 44) 10 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Tallapoosa County No 17.7 (12.8, 23.9) 21 (3, 56) 10 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Clarke County No 28.2 (20.6, 37.8) 1 (1, 24) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.3)
Autauga County No 14.2 (10.4, 19.1) 40 (9, 59) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.1, -0.4)
Covington County No 16.8 (12.1, 23.0) 26 (4, 58) 9 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Escambia County No 17.8 (12.9, 24.2) 18 (3, 57) 9 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.9)
Chilton County No 15.0 (10.7, 20.5) 34 (6, 59) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.2, 1.0)
Dale County No 13.0 (9.3, 17.8) 52 (12, 59) 8 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.7, -1.6)
Lawrence County No 19.4 (13.7, 26.9) 13 (1, 56) 8
*
*
Chambers County No 17.0 (11.7, 23.9) 25 (2, 58) 7 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.3, 1.4)
Coffee County No 10.1 (6.9, 14.2) 58 (26, 59) 7 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.5, -0.9)
Franklin County No 15.2 (10.2, 21.9) 31 (5, 59) 6 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.4, 0.0)
Marengo County No 21.1 (13.9, 31.0) 7 (1, 58) 6
*
*
Barbour County No 16.5 (10.9, 24.3) 27 (3, 59) 6 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.9, 1.6)
Butler County No 17.3 (11.3, 25.8) 22 (2, 59) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.6, 1.9)
Randolph County No 17.8 (11.4, 26.8) 19 (1, 59) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.3)
Fayette County No 22.4 (14.3, 33.9) 5 (1, 57) 5 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.8, 4.2)
Macon County No 20.0 (12.8, 30.3) 11 (1, 58) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.0, 0.6)
Pike County No 14.7 (9.5, 21.8) 36 (4, 59) 5 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.6)
Crenshaw County No 26.9 (17.0, 40.8) 2 (1, 53) 5
*
*
Winston County No 13.9 (8.8, 21.2) 43 (6, 59) 5 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.2)
Geneva County No 13.1 (8.2, 20.3) 48 (5, 59) 5
*
*
Pickens County No 15.5 (9.7, 24.1) 29 (3, 59) 4 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 0.9)
Bibb County No 14.5 (8.8, 22.8) 37 (4, 59) 4
*
*
Cleburne County No 18.6 (11.2, 29.8) 16 (1, 59) 4
*
*
Lamar County No 18.5 (11.2, 29.8) 17 (1, 59) 4 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.1)
Cherokee County No 9.0 (5.4, 14.8) 59 (26, 59) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.5, 0.7)
Henry County No 16.2 (9.4, 26.3) 28 (1, 59) 4 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.9, 1.3)
Washington County No 17.3 (10.2, 27.9) 23 (1, 59) 4
*
*
Conecuh County No 20.9 (11.8, 34.8) 9 (1, 59) 4
*
*
Wilcox County No 26.7 (15.4, 43.5) 3 (1, 58) 4
*
*
Lowndes County No 21.0 (11.9, 35.5) 8 (1, 59) 3
*
*
Monroe County No 10.9 (5.9, 18.7) 57 (9, 59) 3 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.9, 1.3)
Bullock County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Choctaw County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coosa County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greene County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sumter County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/01/2022 5:36 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.

† 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 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.

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

* 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).


Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence 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.

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