Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Iowa by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Recentaapc

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 ascending
Iowa N/A No 150.7 (148.9, 152.4) N/A 6,044 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -1.5)
United States 6 N/A No 151.3 (151.1, 151.5) N/A 463,400 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.1)
Ringgold County Rural No 202.6 (159.5, 256.6) 2 (1, 82) 16 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.1, 2.1)
Bremer County Urban No 139.5 (122.0, 159.1) 76 (20, 97) 49 stable stable trend 0.4 (-4.3, 5.6)
Clarke County Rural No 195.3 (160.8, 236.0) 4 (1, 75) 25 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.9, 1.4)
Monroe County Rural No 168.7 (135.6, 208.7) 22 (1, 96) 19 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.1)
Van Buren County Rural No 202.2 (165.5, 245.8) 3 (1, 65) 23 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.8, 1.3)
Appanoose County Rural No 172.1 (147.5, 200.7) 15 (1, 83) 37 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.1)
Greene County Rural No 186.7 (154.7, 224.5) 6 (1, 80) 27 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.8, 1.0)
Franklin County Rural No 158.4 (129.5, 193.2) 41 (1, 95) 24 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.0)
Adair County Rural No 150.4 (120.1, 187.4) 58 (2, 99) 19 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.8, 0.6)
Davis County Rural No 167.6 (134.3, 207.0) 23 (1, 96) 19 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.2, 0.9)
Emmet County Rural No 179.1 (147.2, 217.2) 8 (1, 89) 26 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.0, 0.7)
Mahaska County Rural No 171.7 (150.8, 195.0) 16 (2, 78) 52 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.6, 0.4)
Howard County Rural No 178.4 (148.3, 213.6) 10 (1, 87) 27 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.1, 0.6)
Grundy County Urban No 152.7 (128.7, 180.7) 53 (5, 97) 30 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.7)
Osceola County Rural No 148.5 (115.5, 190.5) 64 (2, 99) 15 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.4, 0.6)
Palo Alto County Rural No 208.7 (174.6, 248.7) 1 (1, 47) 30 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.3, 0.5)
Boone County Urban No 164.8 (146.0, 185.5) 29 (4, 80) 59 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.1)
Cherokee County Rural No 155.1 (130.3, 184.3) 50 (3, 96) 32 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.3, 0.4)
Decatur County Rural No 170.2 (136.4, 211.1) 18 (1, 94) 19 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Ida County Rural No 176.9 (143.6, 217.2) 11 (1, 89) 21 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.8)
Louisa County Rural No 174.6 (143.0, 212.3) 12 (1, 92) 24 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
Marion County Rural No 166.8 (150.2, 185.0) 24 (4, 75) 77 falling falling trend -0.4 (-0.7, -0.1)
Tama County Rural No 165.8 (141.8, 193.4) 27 (2, 90) 38 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.1)
Washington County Urban No 138.2 (119.6, 159.1) 80 (21, 98) 44 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.4)
Winnebago County Rural No 152.3 (126.4, 183.0) 54 (4, 96) 26 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.3, 0.4)
Chickasaw County Rural No 164.3 (137.2, 195.8) 30 (1, 94) 30 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
Calhoun County Rural No 148.7 (121.3, 181.5) 62 (3, 99) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1)
Guthrie County Urban No 139.8 (114.9, 169.6) 75 (8, 99) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Keokuk County Rural No 159.6 (131.0, 193.4) 36 (2, 97) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.2)
Lucas County Rural No 166.7 (137.3, 201.7) 25 (1, 94) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.0)
Montgomery County Rural No 182.2 (152.4, 217.2) 7 (1, 82) 29 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1)
Page County Rural No 155.2 (133.7, 180.0) 49 (5, 92) 40 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Sac County Rural No 142.9 (116.8, 174.3) 71 (6, 99) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1)
Wapello County Rural No 190.1 (171.8, 210.1) 5 (1, 38) 85 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.2)
Woodbury County Urban No 172.4 (161.3, 184.2) 14 (5, 50) 188 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.2)
Allamakee County Rural No 156.1 (131.4, 184.9) 45 (3, 93) 33 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Carroll County Rural No 139.9 (122.1, 160.1) 74 (19, 97) 48 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Clayton County Rural No 169.5 (147.5, 194.5) 20 (2, 82) 49 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.2)
Des Moines County Rural No 165.5 (150.2, 182.1) 28 (5, 72) 92 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Iowa County Rural No 159.0 (136.7, 184.5) 39 (3, 91) 39 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Mills County Urban No 162.0 (136.5, 191.3) 35 (2, 93) 31 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.2)
Muscatine County Rural No 158.8 (143.2, 175.8) 40 (7, 82) 80 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Union County Rural No 170.3 (142.7, 202.2) 17 (1, 91) 30 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Wayne County Rural No 164.0 (128.8, 207.3) 31 (1, 99) 17 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Audubon County Rural No 149.2 (115.6, 192.0) 59 (2, 99) 15 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.6)
Cedar County Rural No 144.2 (124.3, 166.9) 67 (12, 97) 40 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.5, 0.0)
Clinton County Rural No 173.5 (159.3, 188.9) 13 (3, 58) 116 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Fremont County Rural No 158.2 (124.6, 199.7) 42 (1, 99) 17 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.5)
Henry County Rural No 155.3 (135.0, 178.3) 48 (5, 92) 44 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.5, 0.0)
Jefferson County Rural No 144.0 (121.7, 170.0) 68 (8, 97) 35 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.2)
O'Brien County Rural No 145.3 (122.1, 172.2) 65 (7, 98) 33 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.6, -0.1)
Buena Vista County Rural No 142.4 (119.1, 170.0) 73 (8, 99) 32 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.2)
Crawford County Rural No 133.3 (110.2, 160.9) 85 (16, 99) 27 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.2)
Delaware County Rural No 144.5 (124.5, 167.4) 66 (12, 97) 40 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Jackson County Rural No 153.4 (133.6, 175.8) 52 (7, 92) 47 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.3)
Jasper County Urban No 155.7 (140.7, 172.0) 47 (9, 84) 84 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Mitchell County Rural No 154.5 (128.9, 184.8) 51 (3, 96) 28 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Poweshiek County Rural No 136.8 (117.9, 158.6) 81 (23, 99) 40 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Warren County Urban No 132.2 (119.7, 145.7) 87 (47, 97) 85 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Webster County Rural No 159.3 (143.4, 176.6) 38 (8, 82) 81 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.5)
Dickinson County Rural No 139.5 (120.8, 161.0) 77 (19, 98) 47 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Floyd County Rural No 159.6 (137.3, 185.2) 37 (3, 89) 39 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.4)
Hardin County Rural No 156.3 (135.3, 180.4) 44 (5, 93) 45 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Madison County Urban No 169.6 (145.1, 197.3) 19 (1, 85) 36 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Pocahontas County Rural No 166.2 (133.7, 206.1) 26 (1, 96) 21 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.0, -0.1)
Pottawattamie County Urban No 178.5 (167.5, 190.0) 9 (3, 40) 210 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.4, -0.6)
Adams County Rural Yes 116.5 (80.9, 166.6) 96 (8, 99) 7 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.3, 0.0)
Buchanan County Rural No 162.1 (141.0, 185.7) 34 (3, 87) 44 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Hancock County Rural No 132.3 (108.0, 161.5) 86 (18, 99) 23 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.1)
Lee County Rural No 162.7 (146.8, 180.0) 32 (6, 80) 82 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Marshall County Rural No 162.6 (146.5, 180.4) 33 (5, 80) 80 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Black Hawk County Urban No 148.6 (139.8, 157.9) 63 (31, 82) 224 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.0)
Butler County Rural No 149.2 (126.6, 175.2) 60 (6, 97) 35 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.6)
Kossuth County Rural No 131.3 (110.9, 155.1) 89 (28, 99) 34 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.7)
Lyon County Rural No 151.6 (125.6, 182.0) 55 (4, 97) 26 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.4)
Monona County Rural No 157.2 (129.3, 190.8) 43 (2, 96) 24 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.4)
Plymouth County Rural No 136.5 (119.3, 155.7) 82 (27, 99) 48 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.6)
Sioux County Rural Yes 109.0 (95.2, 124.5) 99 (81, 99) 49 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Worth County Rural No 138.9 (109.9, 174.7) 79 (6, 99) 16 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Benton County Urban No 142.8 (125.4, 162.1) 72 (16, 96) 52 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.9)
Fayette County Rural No 134.3 (115.4, 155.9) 84 (26, 99) 42 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Humboldt County Rural No 129.5 (104.7, 159.7) 91 (17, 99) 20 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.7)
Jones County Urban No 127.3 (109.8, 147.4) 92 (38, 99) 40 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.8)
Linn County Urban No 143.0 (136.6, 149.6) 70 (47, 84) 393 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.6, -1.1)
Cerro Gordo County Rural No 148.9 (135.3, 163.8) 61 (20, 89) 101 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.0)
Harrison County Urban No 150.6 (127.9, 176.8) 57 (5, 96) 33 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.9)
Dubuque County Urban No 143.3 (134.2, 153.0) 69 (39, 88) 194 falling falling trend -1.5 (-5.2, -0.7)
Winneshiek County Rural Yes 111.7 (95.6, 130.4) 98 (72, 99) 37 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Hamilton County Rural No 135.6 (114.7, 159.9) 83 (19, 99) 32 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.9)
Wright County Rural No 139.1 (115.9, 166.7) 78 (12, 99) 29 falling falling trend -1.7 (-7.6, -1.0)
Polk County Urban No 156.1 (150.9, 161.3) 46 (26, 62) 736 falling falling trend -1.9 (-4.0, -1.2)
Shelby County Rural No 129.9 (107.6, 156.4) 90 (19, 99) 27 falling falling trend -2.0 (-11.7, -0.8)
Dallas County Urban Yes 118.5 (108.6, 129.0) 95 (79, 99) 109 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -2.0)
Scott County Urban No 150.7 (143.1, 158.7) 56 (29, 77) 306 falling falling trend -2.7 (-6.5, -1.4)
Story County Urban No 131.5 (120.7, 143.0) 88 (53, 96) 116 falling falling trend -3.1 (-9.2, -1.1)
Cass County Rural No 168.9 (144.0, 197.6) 21 (1, 89) 37 falling falling trend -3.5 (-9.1, -1.1)
Clay County Rural No 122.9 (103.9, 144.9) 93 (43, 99) 32 falling falling trend -4.6 (-18.7, -1.0)
Johnson County Urban Yes 116.4 (108.2, 125.2) 97 (84, 99) 155 falling falling trend -7.4 (-10.8, -3.1)
Taylor County Rural Yes 121.5 (91.9, 160.1) 94 (18, 99) 12 falling falling trend -10.8 (-27.4, -0.6)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/13/2024 7:46 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.
6 Hispanic mortality recent trend data for the United States has been excluded for the following states: Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. The data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality for these states may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2022) and has been excluded from the calculation of the United States recent trend. This was based on the NCHS Policy.

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