Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Iowa by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages 50+

Sorted by Name

County
 sort alphabetically by name descending
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
Iowa N/A No 504.9 (499.2, 510.7) N/A 6,067 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -1.4)
United States N/A No 490.4 (489.9, 491.0) N/A 573,761 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.6)
Adair County Rural No 481.5 (385.9, 594.4) 64 (4, 99) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.4)
Adams County Rural No 391.3 (275.2, 542.0) 96 (7, 99) 7 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.2, -0.1)
Allamakee County Rural No 480.7 (407.8, 563.1) 66 (8, 98) 32 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Appanoose County Rural No 593.1 (508.5, 687.9) 12 (1, 72) 36 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.9, 1.2)
Audubon County Rural No 494.0 (384.9, 625.1) 58 (2, 99) 15 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Benton County Urban No 462.8 (406.3, 524.9) 77 (25, 98) 50 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Black Hawk County Urban No 519.2 (489.9, 549.8) 47 (18, 70) 243 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.0)
Boone County Urban No 549.2 (486.3, 617.8) 25 (4, 81) 58 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.0)
Bremer County Urban No 454.6 (397.5, 517.7) 80 (26, 99) 47 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.5)
Buchanan County Rural No 559.4 (486.4, 640.3) 18 (2, 82) 43 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Buena Vista County Rural No 436.2 (370.1, 510.8) 87 (24, 99) 33 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Butler County Rural No 481.9 (410.0, 562.9) 63 (8, 98) 33 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.6)
Calhoun County Rural No 475.3 (389.0, 575.4) 70 (7, 99) 23 falling falling trend -12.0 (-21.4, -0.8)
Carroll County Rural No 478.6 (418.3, 545.4) 67 (16, 97) 47 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Cass County Rural No 563.8 (482.2, 655.5) 17 (1, 86) 36 falling falling trend -3.2 (-7.5, -1.3)
Cedar County Rural No 490.6 (423.2, 565.8) 61 (10, 97) 40 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.2)
Cerro Gordo County Rural No 467.7 (426.1, 512.4) 73 (31, 93) 97 falling falling trend -7.6 (-12.8, -1.3)
Cherokee County Rural No 510.6 (431.0, 601.0) 53 (5, 97) 31 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.5)
Chickasaw County Rural No 503.7 (422.7, 595.9) 55 (4, 97) 28 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Clarke County Rural No 633.4 (524.8, 758.0) 4 (1, 74) 25 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.9, 1.3)
Clay County Rural No 421.7 (357.0, 494.9) 93 (36, 99) 32 falling falling trend -5.6 (-17.1, -1.5)
Clayton County Rural No 540.2 (471.6, 616.1) 29 (4, 86) 47 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Clinton County Rural No 584.0 (536.6, 634.4) 14 (3, 54) 115 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.3)
Crawford County Rural No 428.2 (357.9, 508.4) 90 (24, 99) 27 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Dallas County Urban No 399.2 (365.7, 434.8) 95 (74, 99) 108 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.7, -1.9)
Davis County Rural No 500.1 (398.5, 619.9) 57 (2, 99) 17 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.4, 0.8)
Decatur County Rural No 595.3 (479.0, 731.8) 10 (1, 91) 19 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.2, 1.1)
Delaware County Rural No 491.9 (424.2, 567.5) 59 (8, 96) 39 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.3)
Des Moines County Rural No 550.0 (500.3, 603.4) 24 (5, 70) 92 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Dickinson County Rural No 451.2 (392.5, 516.6) 82 (26, 99) 45 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.4)
Dubuque County Urban No 486.1 (455.3, 518.4) 62 (34, 85) 191 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.1)
Emmet County Rural No 546.1 (451.3, 655.4) 26 (2, 94) 25 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.6)
Fayette County Rural No 418.0 (361.0, 481.7) 94 (45, 99) 40 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Floyd County Rural No 527.4 (454.6, 608.8) 35 (4, 91) 38 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.3, 0.0)
Franklin County Rural No 507.4 (418.2, 610.3) 54 (3, 98) 23 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.9, 0.9)
Fremont County Rural No 491.4 (389.5, 612.9) 60 (2, 99) 16 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.5)
Greene County Rural No 609.1 (506.5, 726.8) 8 (1, 82) 26 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.0)
Grundy County Urban No 524.8 (442.5, 618.4) 39 (3, 95) 29 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.8)
Guthrie County Urban No 462.8 (382.3, 555.4) 78 (12, 99) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Hamilton County Rural No 463.7 (393.4, 543.3) 76 (14, 99) 32 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.8)
Hancock County Rural No 440.0 (360.4, 532.0) 85 (16, 99) 23 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.1)
Hardin County Rural No 525.5 (456.0, 602.7) 37 (4, 90) 44 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.4)
Harrison County Urban No 514.2 (436.7, 601.6) 50 (5, 95) 32 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.8)
Henry County Rural No 516.3 (449.6, 590.2) 49 (6, 92) 44 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.0)
Howard County Rural No 603.6 (502.6, 719.4) 9 (1, 85) 26 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 0.8)
Humboldt County Rural No 466.7 (378.4, 569.6) 74 (6, 99) 21 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Ida County Rural No 626.4 (510.6, 761.6) 5 (1, 82) 21 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 0.9)
Iowa County Rural No 522.8 (449.6, 604.6) 44 (3, 93) 38 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Jackson County Rural No 512.4 (446.8, 584.8) 51 (7, 92) 45 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Jasper County Urban No 524.7 (474.5, 578.8) 41 (8, 81) 82 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.4)
Jefferson County Rural No 477.2 (406.1, 557.3) 69 (8, 98) 35 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.2)
Johnson County Urban No 388.2 (361.1, 416.7) 97 (82, 99) 159 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.4, -2.3)
Jones County Urban No 428.1 (369.5, 493.5) 91 (33, 99) 39 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Keokuk County Rural No 526.0 (432.4, 634.0) 36 (2, 96) 23 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
Kossuth County Rural No 450.0 (382.0, 526.8) 83 (15, 99) 34 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Lee County Rural No 559.2 (506.1, 616.4) 19 (4, 67) 84 falling falling trend -1.3 (-6.5, -0.6)
Linn County Urban No 481.0 (459.8, 503.0) 65 (42, 81) 394 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.6, -1.1)
Louisa County Rural No 538.8 (444.0, 647.6) 30 (2, 96) 23 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.5)
Lucas County Rural No 572.1 (471.5, 688.2) 15 (1, 92) 23 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Lyon County Rural No 512.3 (423.5, 614.6) 52 (3, 97) 25 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Madison County Urban No 558.3 (476.3, 650.2) 20 (2, 87) 34 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.4)
Mahaska County Rural No 555.6 (487.6, 630.6) 21 (2, 80) 50 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.7, 0.4)
Marion County Rural No 552.8 (497.6, 612.4) 22 (4, 76) 75 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.6, 0.2)
Marshall County Rural No 528.8 (478.0, 583.5) 34 (7, 80) 81 falling falling trend -1.5 (-7.6, -0.9)
Mills County Urban No 502.9 (423.0, 593.4) 56 (5, 96) 29 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Mitchell County Rural No 545.2 (455.4, 648.0) 27 (2, 94) 28 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Monona County Rural No 533.6 (440.9, 640.8) 32 (2, 96) 24 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.2)
Monroe County Rural No 590.7 (476.5, 724.2) 13 (1, 92) 19 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.8, 1.3)
Montgomery County Rural No 613.0 (514.8, 724.7) 7 (1, 80) 29 stable stable trend 1.2 (-1.0, 10.7)
Muscatine County Rural No 522.0 (472.3, 575.6) 45 (10, 80) 83 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
O'Brien County Rural No 477.7 (402.9, 562.6) 68 (8, 99) 32 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.2)
Osceola County Rural No 522.9 (410.3, 657.3) 43 (2, 99) 15 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 0.6)
Page County Rural No 524.7 (452.7, 605.3) 40 (4, 93) 39 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.2)
Palo Alto County Rural No 704.8 (591.0, 834.5) 2 (1, 44) 29 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
Plymouth County Rural No 454.1 (397.1, 517.0) 81 (27, 98) 47 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.5)
Pocahontas County Rural No 541.2 (438.6, 661.4) 28 (1, 96) 20 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 0.0)
Polk County Urban No 538.6 (521.4, 556.1) 31 (18, 52) 778 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.1, -0.8)
Pottawattamie County Urban No 594.8 (558.7, 632.7) 11 (3, 36) 208 falling falling trend -0.9 (-3.9, -0.3)
Poweshiek County Rural No 460.3 (397.7, 530.3) 79 (18, 98) 40 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Ringgold County Rural No 718.2 (565.4, 900.2) 1 (1, 62) 16 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.3, 2.2)
Sac County Rural No 466.1 (382.6, 562.7) 75 (8, 99) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Scott County Urban No 516.5 (491.3, 542.7) 48 (23, 68) 324 falling falling trend -2.3 (-6.6, -1.2)
Shelby County Rural No 439.6 (365.2, 525.0) 86 (17, 99) 26 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.4)
Sioux County Rural No 364.4 (318.4, 415.2) 99 (80, 99) 48 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Story County Urban No 426.7 (391.8, 463.9) 92 (61, 98) 114 falling falling trend -4.0 (-9.7, -1.5)
Tama County Rural No 552.4 (476.5, 636.9) 23 (2, 86) 39 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.2)
Taylor County Rural No 429.2 (327.1, 554.2) 89 (6, 99) 12 falling falling trend -4.7 (-9.1, -2.5)
Union County Rural No 529.9 (444.9, 626.6) 33 (3, 95) 28 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1)
Van Buren County Rural No 664.1 (545.0, 801.9) 3 (1, 70) 23 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.7, 1.7)
Wapello County Rural No 614.7 (556.4, 677.5) 6 (1, 46) 84 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.1, -0.3)
Warren County Urban No 443.2 (401.1, 488.5) 84 (45, 98) 83 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Washington County Urban No 429.8 (372.8, 493.2) 88 (39, 99) 42 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Wayne County Rural No 521.6 (410.2, 654.8) 46 (1, 99) 16 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.2)
Webster County Rural No 524.4 (473.4, 579.4) 42 (7, 82) 81 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.5)
Winnebago County Rural No 525.0 (436.5, 626.6) 38 (2, 96) 26 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.5)
Winneshiek County Rural No 374.1 (320.9, 434.0) 98 (67, 99) 36 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.7)
Woodbury County Urban No 566.3 (530.8, 603.6) 16 (6, 51) 195 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.0, -0.4)
Worth County Rural No 469.4 (371.3, 586.0) 72 (5, 99) 16 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.2)
Wright County Rural No 469.8 (393.6, 556.8) 71 (10, 99) 29 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.7, -1.2)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/10/2024 12:36 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.

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