Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Illinois by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages 65+

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
Illinois N/A No 879.1 (873.2, 885.0) N/A 17,481 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.2, -1.6)
United States N/A No 844.0 (842.9, 845.1) N/A 441,232 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.5)
Alexander County Urban No 1,477.5 (1,185.0, 1,820.3) 1 (1, 40) 18 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.1)
Pulaski County Rural No 1,332.7 (1,044.9, 1,675.4) 2 (1, 83) 15 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Ford County Urban No 1,210.8 (1,022.6, 1,423.2) 3 (1, 68) 30 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.3, 1.2)
Fulton County Rural No 1,199.6 (1,085.1, 1,323.0) 4 (1, 32) 81 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.7, 0.1)
Mason County Rural No 1,153.6 (984.5, 1,343.5) 5 (1, 77) 33 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.9, 1.1)
Scott County Rural No 1,118.6 (836.3, 1,464.5) 6 (1, 102) 11 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.2)
Hardin County Rural No 1,118.5 (834.8, 1,467.7) 7 (1, 102) 11 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.3, 1.2)
Crawford County Rural No 1,116.3 (965.7, 1,283.8) 8 (1, 81) 40 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.4, 0.9)
Logan County Rural No 1,116.1 (991.0, 1,252.5) 9 (1, 71) 59 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.6, 0.4)
Marion County Rural No 1,107.0 (1,000.6, 1,221.6) 10 (2, 54) 80 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.6, 0.7)
Gallatin County Rural No 1,100.4 (837.9, 1,418.0) 11 (1, 101) 12 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.4)
Pike County Rural No 1,096.2 (937.8, 1,273.6) 12 (1, 86) 35 stable stable trend -0.2 (-3.4, 0.5)
Iroquois County Rural No 1,095.9 (978.8, 1,223.1) 13 (2, 70) 64 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.3, 0.5)
Franklin County Rural No 1,076.6 (973.9, 1,187.1) 14 (3, 70) 81 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Saline County Rural No 1,071.5 (943.8, 1,211.6) 15 (2, 78) 51 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.1)
Moultrie County Rural No 1,069.7 (897.9, 1,264.5) 16 (1, 96) 28 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.0)
Calhoun County Urban No 1,068.7 (808.8, 1,385.3) 17 (1, 102) 11 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.6)
Clark County Rural No 1,068.3 (907.7, 1,249.3) 18 (2, 91) 32 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.4, 1.0)
Vermilion County Rural No 1,067.3 (992.5, 1,146.2) 19 (5, 56) 153 falling falling trend -0.4 (-0.8, -0.1)
Warren County Rural No 1,066.4 (912.9, 1,238.3) 20 (2, 92) 35 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Jersey County Urban No 1,063.1 (925.2, 1,215.5) 21 (2, 90) 43 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Stark County Urban No 1,061.6 (816.6, 1,357.3) 22 (1, 102) 13 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.0)
Greene County Rural No 1,061.2 (883.1, 1,264.6) 23 (1, 98) 25 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
Lawrence County Rural No 1,058.5 (892.5, 1,246.5) 24 (2, 98) 29 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
La Salle County Rural No 1,050.0 (987.3, 1,115.6) 25 (7, 51) 213 falling falling trend -0.5 (-0.8, -0.2)
Montgomery County Rural No 1,032.2 (917.1, 1,157.8) 26 (4, 83) 60 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Grundy County Urban No 1,030.1 (926.1, 1,142.5) 27 (5, 82) 73 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Jefferson County Rural No 1,029.9 (925.5, 1,142.8) 28 (4, 81) 72 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.2)
De Witt County Rural No 1,026.8 (867.4, 1,206.7) 29 (2, 97) 30 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.6, -0.1)
Morgan County Rural No 1,026.7 (919.7, 1,142.7) 30 (4, 86) 68 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Christian County Rural No 1,020.7 (913.7, 1,136.7) 31 (4, 86) 67 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.1)
Shelby County Rural No 1,019.4 (894.6, 1,156.8) 32 (4, 91) 49 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.4)
Clay County Rural No 1,011.9 (845.2, 1,201.6) 33 (2, 100) 26 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.9, 0.9)
Mercer County Urban No 1,003.6 (855.1, 1,170.2) 34 (3, 98) 33 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.5)
Knox County Rural No 992.1 (908.7, 1,081.0) 35 (9, 83) 106 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.0)
Randolph County Rural No 982.7 (873.2, 1,102.2) 36 (7, 95) 60 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.3)
Douglas County Rural No 978.8 (838.0, 1,136.4) 37 (4, 99) 35 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
DeKalb County Urban No 975.6 (900.0, 1,055.9) 38 (13, 84) 126 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.7, 0.2)
Bond County Urban No 974.7 (820.7, 1,149.2) 39 (4, 101) 29 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Menard County Urban No 972.1 (800.3, 1,169.9) 40 (2, 102) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Whiteside County Rural No 970.8 (891.4, 1,055.3) 41 (11, 88) 112 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.7, 0.2)
Livingston County Rural No 966.7 (864.0, 1,078.2) 42 (7, 94) 66 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Macoupin County Urban No 964.5 (875.2, 1,060.4) 43 (10, 91) 88 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.8, 0.0)
Madison County Urban No 964.3 (924.0, 1,006.0) 44 (25, 73) 437 falling falling trend -0.7 (-0.9, -0.4)
Kankakee County Urban No 962.7 (898.9, 1,029.9) 45 (18, 84) 172 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.6)
St. Clair County Urban No 955.7 (912.7, 1,000.2) 46 (26, 78) 382 falling falling trend -1.3 (-3.0, -1.0)
Macon County Urban No 955.5 (896.2, 1,017.6) 47 (22, 83) 198 falling falling trend -1.6 (-4.6, -0.9)
Hamilton County Rural No 953.2 (757.4, 1,184.0) 48 (2, 102) 16 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.4)
Edwards County Rural No 952.4 (730.3, 1,220.6) 49 (2, 102) 13 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 0.9)
Lee County Rural No 947.5 (846.2, 1,057.6) 50 (12, 95) 65 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.1)
Fayette County Rural No 945.6 (814.0, 1,092.4) 51 (6, 100) 37 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.2)
Richland County Rural No 938.9 (795.1, 1,101.3) 52 (6, 102) 31 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.3)
Wabash County Rural No 938.4 (772.0, 1,129.9) 53 (4, 102) 23 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Coles County Rural No 938.0 (845.8, 1,037.4) 54 (13, 96) 77 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
McHenry County Urban No 936.5 (896.0, 978.5) 55 (31, 80) 414 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.5)
Union County Rural No 935.8 (804.2, 1,082.8) 56 (7, 101) 36 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.1)
Tazewell County Urban No 934.8 (881.3, 990.7) 57 (27, 86) 231 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.5)
Will County Urban No 932.7 (904.0, 962.1) 58 (37, 78) 821 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -1.1)
Wayne County Rural No 930.9 (793.9, 1,084.6) 59 (7, 101) 33 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.1)
Carroll County Rural No 926.5 (792.0, 1,077.3) 60 (7, 101) 34 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Cass County Rural No 925.7 (751.8, 1,127.3) 61 (4, 102) 20 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.8, -0.1)
Bureau County Rural No 923.7 (827.0, 1,028.6) 62 (15, 97) 68 falling falling trend -1.5 (-7.2, -0.8)
White County Rural No 923.2 (778.6, 1,086.6) 63 (5, 102) 30 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Winnebago County Urban No 920.5 (882.8, 959.5) 64 (36, 84) 455 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.4, -1.2)
Ogle County Rural No 915.7 (831.7, 1,005.9) 65 (20, 97) 88 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.1, -0.3)
Adams County Rural No 912.4 (840.3, 989.0) 66 (26, 96) 121 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Stephenson County Rural No 910.9 (829.7, 997.9) 67 (21, 97) 95 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.2)
Williamson County Rural No 910.5 (836.6, 989.1) 68 (27, 96) 113 falling falling trend -3.2 (-9.4, -1.2)
Brown County Rural No 909.8 (654.1, 1,232.1) 69 (1, 102) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.3, 1.1)
Jasper County Rural No 908.7 (724.5, 1,125.7) 70 (3, 102) 17 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.5)
Jackson County Rural No 907.0 (816.1, 1,005.1) 71 (20, 99) 75 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Rock Island County Urban No 905.9 (856.0, 958.1) 72 (35, 91) 249 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.7)
Effingham County Rural No 905.5 (800.3, 1,020.5) 73 (17, 101) 54 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Edgar County Rural No 904.2 (775.3, 1,048.4) 74 (9, 102) 36 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1)
Kendall County Urban No 903.9 (830.6, 981.8) 75 (27, 97) 117 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.3)
Massac County Urban No 901.1 (754.3, 1,068.1) 76 (7, 102) 27 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Peoria County Urban No 898.5 (851.4, 947.4) 77 (40, 92) 279 falling falling trend -2.0 (-5.9, -1.1)
Sangamon County Urban No 898.1 (853.4, 944.5) 78 (41, 91) 310 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -1.2)
Henderson County Rural No 890.7 (698.2, 1,119.8) 79 (3, 102) 15 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Piatt County Urban No 889.1 (749.4, 1,047.1) 80 (10, 102) 29 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.4)
Henry County Urban No 888.0 (806.7, 975.3) 81 (28, 100) 89 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Boone County Urban No 882.3 (793.0, 979.0) 82 (25, 100) 72 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Marshall County Urban No 882.3 (730.3, 1,056.3) 83 (9, 102) 24 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.3)
Perry County Rural No 880.9 (755.3, 1,021.2) 84 (15, 102) 36 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
McLean County Urban No 880.7 (826.1, 938.1) 85 (40, 96) 199 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.7)
Putnam County Rural No 878.9 (661.7, 1,144.6) 86 (3, 102) 11 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.2, 0.1)
Johnson County Rural No 873.7 (719.5, 1,051.2) 87 (9, 102) 23 stable stable trend -1.0 (-1.9, 0.0)
Woodford County Urban No 872.1 (775.3, 977.7) 88 (23, 101) 61 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.1)
Jo Daviess County Rural No 843.0 (742.7, 953.1) 89 (30, 102) 52 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
McDonough County Rural No 839.9 (727.9, 964.2) 90 (26, 102) 42 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.4, -0.1)
Lake County Urban No 839.2 (813.7, 865.4) 91 (74, 97) 839 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -1.5)
Cook County Urban No 835.4 (826.2, 844.7) 92 (78, 95) 6,405 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.3, -2.3)
Monroe County Urban No 828.8 (728.9, 938.4) 93 (36, 102) 51 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.0)
Kane County Urban No 812.6 (782.7, 843.4) 94 (78, 100) 571 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -1.3)
Pope County Rural No 810.8 (589.8, 1,088.0) 95 (5, 102) 9 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.7)
Clinton County Urban No 809.2 (711.5, 916.4) 96 (40, 102) 51 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Washington County Rural No 804.0 (661.4, 968.1) 97 (22, 102) 23 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.4, -0.7)
Cumberland County Rural No 782.0 (617.4, 976.8) 98 (14, 102) 16 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
DuPage County Urban No 771.6 (751.2, 792.4) 99 (90, 102) 1,112 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.6, -1.6)
Hancock County Rural No 764.9 (649.6, 894.8) 100 (42, 102) 32 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Champaign County Urban No 761.7 (714.7, 811.1) 101 (84, 102) 202 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -1.5)
Schuyler County Rural No 745.4 (564.6, 965.7) 102 (14, 102) 12 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.4)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/22/2024 4:00 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 (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.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.


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