Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Indiana by County

Colon & Rectum, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Count

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
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 descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Indiana N/A No 14.6 (14.2, 15.0) N/A 1,189 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.4)
United States N/A No 12.9 (12.8, 12.9) N/A 52,325 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Blackford County Rural No 16.4 (9.2, 28.0) 29 (1, 83) 3 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.2, 0.9)
Newton County Urban No 16.5 (9.2, 27.9) 27 (1, 83) 3 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.9, -0.1)
Pike County Rural No 19.8 (10.9, 33.5) 6 (1, 83) 3
*
*
Vermillion County Urban No 15.3 (8.3, 26.1) 48 (1, 83) 3 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.3, 0.0)
Parke County Rural No 13.2 (7.7, 22.1) 75 (2, 83) 3
*
*
Pulaski County Rural No 17.4 (10.2, 28.9) 22 (1, 83) 4
*
*
Spencer County Rural No 13.1 (7.6, 21.5) 77 (2, 83) 4 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.4, -0.1)
Tipton County Urban No 15.0 (8.8, 24.9) 51 (1, 83) 4
*
*
Rush County Rural No 18.4 (10.9, 29.3) 11 (1, 83) 4 stable stable trend 21.3 (-1.9, 63.8)
Fountain County Rural No 15.7 (9.7, 24.8) 41 (1, 83) 4 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.9, -0.1)
Carroll County Urban No 15.1 (9.4, 23.5) 49 (1, 83) 4 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 0.8)
Franklin County Urban No 14.8 (9.2, 22.8) 54 (1, 83) 5 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.3, 0.6)
Owen County Urban No 15.7 (9.8, 24.3) 40 (1, 83) 5 falling falling trend -5.4 (-23.7, -1.4)
Jay County Rural No 17.7 (11.2, 27.0) 19 (1, 83) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.5, 1.5)
Fulton County Rural No 19.0 (12.1, 28.8) 9 (1, 82) 5
*
*
Scott County Rural No 16.2 (10.4, 24.5) 32 (1, 83) 5
*
*
Decatur County Rural No 14.8 (9.5, 22.0) 56 (1, 83) 5 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.3)
Sullivan County Urban No 20.0 (12.9, 29.8) 4 (1, 82) 5 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.9, -1.0)
Wells County Urban No 13.8 (8.9, 20.8) 70 (3, 83) 5 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.7, 0.1)
Fayette County Rural No 15.6 (10.2, 23.2) 44 (1, 83) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.7, -0.1)
White County Rural No 13.9 (9.1, 20.9) 69 (3, 83) 5 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.8, 0.7)
Jennings County Rural No 16.2 (10.6, 23.8) 34 (1, 83) 6 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.2, 0.1)
Randolph County Rural No 15.6 (10.3, 23.1) 43 (1, 83) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.4)
Washington County Urban No 18.1 (12.1, 26.1) 16 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.2)
Ripley County Rural No 15.9 (10.7, 22.9) 39 (1, 83) 6 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.2, 0.2)
Jasper County Urban No 14.4 (9.8, 20.7) 64 (2, 83) 6 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.3)
Orange County Rural No 21.9 (14.8, 31.6) 1 (1, 79) 6 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.8)
Clay County Urban No 17.8 (12.1, 25.6) 17 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.0, 0.5)
Daviess County Rural No 17.8 (12.2, 25.2) 18 (1, 82) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.2)
Adams County Rural No 14.9 (10.2, 21.1) 53 (2, 83) 7 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.5, -0.5)
Knox County Rural No 14.1 (9.6, 20.0) 67 (4, 83) 7 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.5, -0.3)
Posey County Urban No 19.9 (13.5, 28.4) 5 (1, 78) 7 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.6, -0.6)
Starke County Rural No 20.3 (13.8, 29.1) 2 (1, 79) 7 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.0, 0.3)
Gibson County Rural No 16.6 (11.5, 23.5) 25 (1, 82) 7 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.2, 0.0)
Huntington County Rural No 14.8 (10.2, 20.9) 55 (3, 83) 7 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.0, -1.0)
LaGrange County Rural No 16.2 (11.2, 22.8) 33 (1, 83) 7 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.3, -1.0)
Putnam County Rural No 15.1 (10.4, 21.3) 50 (3, 83) 7 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.7, 0.6)
Whitley County Urban No 16.0 (11.1, 22.6) 36 (1, 82) 7 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.4, -0.2)
Clinton County Rural No 18.2 (12.7, 25.4) 14 (1, 82) 7 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.2)
DeKalb County Rural No 14.4 (10.1, 20.0) 63 (5, 83) 8 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -1.0)
Greene County Rural No 18.1 (12.7, 25.2) 15 (1, 80) 8 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.0, -0.7)
Jefferson County Rural No 17.6 (12.4, 24.5) 20 (1, 82) 8 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.0, 0.1)
Montgomery County Rural No 15.6 (11.0, 21.8) 42 (2, 83) 8 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.4, -1.4)
Cass County Rural No 15.4 (11.0, 21.3) 45 (2, 83) 8 stable stable trend 0.1 (-3.6, 12.3)
Dubois County Rural No 14.9 (10.6, 20.6) 52 (2, 83) 8 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.6)
Noble County Rural No 14.4 (10.3, 19.8) 62 (4, 83) 8 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.5)
Steuben County Rural No 15.9 (11.3, 22.0) 38 (1, 82) 8 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.6, -0.1)
Warrick County Urban No 9.7 (7.0, 13.3) 82 (48, 83) 8 falling falling trend -4.2 (-5.7, -2.9)
Dearborn County Urban No 13.0 (9.3, 17.7) 78 (11, 83) 9 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.3, -0.7)
Harrison County Urban No 16.4 (11.8, 22.3) 30 (2, 81) 9 falling falling trend -2.3 (-4.1, -0.5)
Wabash County Rural No 18.2 (13.1, 25.0) 13 (1, 79) 9 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.0)
Miami County Rural No 19.4 (14.1, 26.1) 7 (1, 77) 9
*
*
Shelby County Urban No 16.1 (11.8, 21.7) 35 (2, 81) 10 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.3)
Jackson County Rural No 17.0 (12.5, 22.7) 24 (1, 79) 10 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.6)
Marshall County Rural No 18.9 (14.1, 25.0) 10 (1, 76) 11 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.5, -0.5)
Hancock County Urban No 11.1 (8.4, 14.6) 80 (35, 83) 11 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -0.5)
Lawrence County Rural No 17.4 (13.0, 23.0) 23 (1, 79) 11 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.4, -0.5)
Boone County Urban No 14.5 (11.0, 18.9) 59 (7, 82) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.0, -0.7)
Morgan County Urban No 14.5 (11.2, 18.7) 58 (8, 81) 13 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.5)
Henry County Rural No 20.2 (15.6, 25.8) 3 (1, 67) 14 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.5, 6.7)
Kosciusko County Rural No 13.7 (10.6, 17.4) 72 (14, 82) 14 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.2)
Bartholomew County Urban No 13.9 (10.9, 17.7) 68 (12, 81) 14 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.4, -1.0)
Monroe County Urban No 11.2 (8.8, 14.1) 79 (41, 83) 16 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.5, -1.4)
Floyd County Urban No 15.9 (12.5, 20.0) 37 (4, 79) 16 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.6, -1.2)
Grant County Rural No 17.5 (13.8, 21.9) 21 (2, 74) 16 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.7)
Wayne County Rural No 19.2 (15.3, 23.8) 8 (1, 64) 18 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.2)
Hendricks County Urban No 10.4 (8.5, 12.8) 81 (57, 83) 20 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.1, -2.4)
Clark County Urban No 13.7 (11.1, 16.8) 71 (18, 81) 20 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.9, -1.9)
Howard County Urban No 18.3 (14.8, 22.5) 12 (1, 70) 20 stable stable trend 2.2 (-1.5, 9.7)
Delaware County Urban No 15.3 (12.5, 18.8) 47 (8, 78) 21 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.8)
Vigo County Urban No 16.6 (13.6, 20.1) 26 (4, 73) 22 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.2, -1.5)
LaPorte County Urban No 16.3 (13.4, 19.6) 31 (5, 74) 23 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.3)
Tippecanoe County Urban No 14.2 (11.8, 17.1) 65 (16, 79) 24 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.1, 2.6)
Johnson County Urban No 13.1 (10.9, 15.7) 76 (26, 81) 25 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -1.1)
Madison County Urban No 14.7 (12.2, 17.6) 57 (15, 78) 26 stable stable trend 10.4 (-2.0, 18.8)
Hamilton County Urban Yes 8.8 (7.4, 10.3) 83 (75, 83) 31 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.2, -2.1)
Elkhart County Urban No 14.5 (12.4, 16.9) 60 (18, 78) 34 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
Vanderburgh County Urban No 14.5 (12.3, 16.9) 61 (19, 77) 34 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.5)
Porter County Urban No 16.5 (14.1, 19.2) 28 (7, 69) 36 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.8, -1.3)
St. Joseph County Urban No 14.1 (12.3, 16.2) 66 (26, 77) 46 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.9, -1.8)
Allen County Urban No 13.3 (11.8, 14.9) 74 (37, 78) 58 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.6)
Lake County Urban No 15.4 (14.0, 16.9) 46 (21, 65) 98 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.0, -2.0)
Marion County Urban No 13.5 (12.5, 14.6) 73 (42, 75) 132 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.6, -1.7)
Benton County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Brown County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crawford County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Martin County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ohio County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Switzerland County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Warren County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/02/2024 9:12 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.


Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.

* 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