Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Alabama by County

Prostate, 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Count
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 16.9?
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 20.2 (19.4, 21.1) N/A 508 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.7, 3.3)
United States No 18.8 (18.7, 18.9) N/A 31,337 stable stable trend -0.5 (-0.9, 0.0)
Jefferson County No 24.1 (21.6, 26.7) 10 (5, 19) 75 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.5, -2.4)
Mobile County No 19.3 (16.6, 22.2) 20 (11, 32) 40 falling falling trend -3.2 (-3.8, -2.5)
Madison County No 19.2 (16.3, 22.4) 21 (11, 32) 33 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.0, -2.1)
Montgomery County No 27.9 (23.4, 33.1) 6 (2, 17) 28 stable stable trend 2.9 (-9.6, 17.3)
Baldwin County Yes 16.8 (13.8, 20.2) 28 (15, 37) 24 falling falling trend -3.8 (-4.5, -3.1)
Lee County No 28.2 (22.3, 35.0) 5 (2, 20) 17 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.6, -0.5)
Shelby County Yes 15.3 (12.1, 19.2) 32 (16, 38) 16 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.3, -2.1)
Tuscaloosa County No 19.0 (14.8, 24.0) 23 (8, 36) 15 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.4, -1.9)
Calhoun County No 21.5 (16.2, 28.0) 15 (4, 35) 12 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.1, -1.2)
Talladega County No 24.9 (18.6, 32.8) 8 (3, 30) 11 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.0, -1.1)
Etowah County No 19.4 (14.5, 25.6) 19 (6, 37) 11 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.4, -1.2)
St. Clair County No 22.9 (16.9, 30.3) 13 (3, 34) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.2)
Houston County No 18.5 (13.7, 24.5) 25 (7, 37) 10 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.0, -1.1)
Lauderdale County Yes 16.6 (12.1, 22.4) 30 (10, 38) 9 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.0, -0.6)
Morgan County Yes 14.5 (10.4, 19.6) 35 (15, 38) 9 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.5, -2.1)
Russell County No 36.7 (26.1, 49.9) 3 (1, 17) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.3, -0.1)
Marshall County No 17.5 (12.5, 23.8) 27 (7, 38) 8 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.2, -1.2)
Walker County No 23.1 (16.5, 31.6) 12 (3, 35) 8 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.5)
Dallas County No 40.2 (28.4, 55.4) 2 (1, 14) 8 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.5, -0.7)
Elmore County No 19.0 (13.1, 26.6) 24 (5, 38) 7 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.1, -1.6)
Tallapoosa County No 26.0 (17.8, 36.9) 7 (2, 33) 7 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.8, -1.0)
Cullman County Yes 12.7 (8.5, 18.3) 37 (17, 38) 6 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.1, -1.1)
Jackson County No 21.2 (14.2, 30.7) 16 (3, 37) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.2, -0.7)
Limestone County Yes 14.1 (9.4, 20.4) 36 (13, 38) 6
*
*
DeKalb County Yes 14.7 (9.7, 21.4) 34 (11, 38) 6 stable stable trend -2.2 (-4.6, 0.4)
Blount County Yes 16.7 (11.0, 24.5) 29 (7, 38) 6 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.4, -1.9)
Covington County No 22.5 (14.9, 33.1) 14 (3, 38) 6 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.0, -0.1)
Macon County No 55.8 (36.3, 82.5) 1 (1, 8) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.1, 1.1)
Dale County No 20.2 (13.0, 29.8) 18 (3, 38) 5 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.1, 0.0)
Clarke County No 30.0 (18.8, 46.0) 4 (1, 34) 5 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.2, -0.6)
Coffee County Yes 15.9 (10.0, 24.2) 31 (7, 38) 5 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.3, -2.1)
Autauga County Yes 15.0 (9.2, 23.1) 33 (9, 38) 4 falling falling trend -4.8 (-6.6, -3.0)
Chambers County No 20.2 (12.3, 31.7) 17 (3, 38) 4 falling falling trend -3.2 (-5.1, -1.2)
Geneva County No 23.6 (14.4, 37.1) 11 (2, 38) 4 falling falling trend -2.9 (-5.1, -0.6)
Colbert County Yes 11.6 (7.0, 18.3) 38 (19, 38) 4 falling falling trend -3.4 (-5.3, -1.5)
Escambia County No 19.1 (11.6, 30.0) 22 (4, 38) 4 falling falling trend -4.0 (-5.8, -2.2)
Marion County No 18.1 (10.8, 29.1) 26 (4, 38) 4
*
*
Barbour County No 24.6 (14.2, 39.8) 9 (2, 38) 4
*
*
Bibb County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bullock County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Butler County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cherokee County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chilton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Choctaw County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cleburne County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Conecuh County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coosa County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crenshaw County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fayette County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Franklin County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greene County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Henry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lamar County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lawrence County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lowndes County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Marengo County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Monroe County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pickens County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pike County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Randolph County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sumter County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Washington County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wilcox County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Winston County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/19/2024 5:02 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.
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