Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Ohio 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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Ohio N/A No 13.9 (13.6, 14.2) N/A 2,118 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.3, -0.9)
United States N/A No 12.9 (12.8, 12.9) N/A 52,325 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Cuyahoga County Urban No 13.8 (13.0, 14.6) 63 (39, 71) 240 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.3, 2.4)
Franklin County Urban No 11.2 (10.4, 12.1) 78 (65, 84) 143 falling falling trend -3.6 (-4.6, -3.2)
Hamilton County Urban No 13.9 (12.9, 15.0) 61 (34, 72) 139 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.8, -2.1)
Montgomery County Urban No 13.5 (12.3, 14.9) 64 (35, 75) 97 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.8, -2.0)
Summit County Urban No 13.1 (12.0, 14.4) 68 (42, 77) 97 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.6)
Lucas County Urban No 15.4 (13.9, 17.0) 42 (19, 66) 83 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.7)
Stark County Urban No 12.0 (10.7, 13.5) 74 (50, 83) 64 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.5, -2.2)
Butler County Urban No 13.9 (12.4, 15.6) 58 (28, 77) 61 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.6)
Mahoning County Urban No 14.9 (13.1, 16.9) 46 (19, 73) 53 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.5)
Lorain County Urban No 11.4 (10.0, 12.9) 77 (54, 85) 50 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.1, -2.0)
Lake County Urban No 14.3 (12.4, 16.3) 57 (22, 76) 48 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.5)
Trumbull County Urban No 13.4 (11.6, 15.5) 65 (29, 80) 42 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.4, -1.2)
Clermont County Urban No 14.8 (12.8, 17.1) 48 (16, 76) 40 stable stable trend 3.8 (-2.3, 13.9)
Portage County Urban No 14.9 (12.5, 17.6) 47 (15, 77) 30 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Clark County Urban No 15.5 (13.0, 18.4) 41 (11, 75) 29 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.3)
Warren County Urban No 10.4 (8.7, 12.3) 81 (59, 86) 28 falling falling trend -3.2 (-4.1, -2.3)
Licking County Urban No 12.6 (10.6, 15.0) 72 (29, 84) 28 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.6)
Richland County Urban No 15.2 (12.7, 18.2) 44 (12, 78) 27 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.6, -1.8)
Medina County Urban No 10.2 (8.5, 12.2) 83 (61, 86) 25 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.6, -2.2)
Wood County Urban No 15.7 (13.0, 18.9) 40 (9, 76) 24 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.3, -0.7)
Tuscarawas County Rural No 18.3 (15.0, 22.1) 18 (3, 65) 24 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.5)
Columbiana County Rural No 14.8 (12.2, 18.0) 49 (13, 80) 23 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -1.3)
Fairfield County Urban No 11.5 (9.4, 13.8) 76 (43, 86) 23 falling falling trend -3.5 (-4.5, -2.6)
Delaware County Urban No 9.9 (8.1, 12.0) 84 (63, 86) 22 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.6, -1.8)
Miami County Urban No 14.5 (11.8, 17.6) 54 (13, 82) 22 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.6)
Ashtabula County Urban No 14.5 (11.7, 17.8) 55 (12, 82) 20 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.4, -1.6)
Greene County Urban No 9.3 (7.5, 11.4) 85 (68, 86) 20 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.3, -2.4)
Wayne County Rural No 12.0 (9.7, 14.7) 75 (32, 86) 19 falling falling trend -3.5 (-13.0, -2.3)
Geauga County Urban No 12.7 (10.2, 15.9) 71 (22, 85) 18 falling falling trend -3.2 (-4.3, -2.2)
Erie County Urban No 14.3 (11.4, 17.8) 56 (13, 83) 18 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 2.6)
Lawrence County Urban No 22.0 (17.5, 27.4) 6 (1, 48) 17 rising rising trend 14.5 (0.1, 25.2)
Allen County Urban No 13.0 (10.2, 16.2) 70 (20, 85) 17 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.1, -1.7)
Jefferson County Urban No 16.7 (13.2, 21.0) 30 (5, 77) 17 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.4)
Muskingum County Rural No 13.9 (10.9, 17.4) 62 (14, 84) 16 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.8, -1.8)
Hancock County Rural No 16.0 (12.6, 20.1) 38 (6, 79) 16 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.5)
Belmont County Urban No 14.5 (11.4, 18.3) 53 (11, 84) 16 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.2, -1.1)
Scioto County Rural No 15.8 (12.4, 19.9) 39 (6, 82) 15 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.9)
Washington County Rural No 16.6 (12.9, 21.1) 31 (5, 80) 15 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.2, -0.1)
Darke County Rural No 18.7 (14.5, 23.9) 15 (2, 72) 14 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.1)
Ross County Rural No 14.6 (11.3, 18.6) 52 (10, 84) 14 falling falling trend -3.6 (-8.0, -2.7)
Ashland County Rural No 18.0 (13.8, 23.1) 19 (2, 76) 13 falling falling trend -19.3 (-34.0, -1.1)
Sandusky County Rural No 16.2 (12.4, 20.8) 34 (4, 82) 13 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Seneca County Rural No 17.9 (13.7, 23.0) 21 (3, 77) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Knox County Rural No 15.1 (11.5, 19.5) 45 (7, 85) 12 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.7, -1.3)
Huron County Rural No 16.0 (12.1, 20.8) 37 (5, 82) 12 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.8, -0.8)
Pickaway County Urban No 17.0 (12.9, 22.1) 27 (4, 81) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.1, -0.6)
Shelby County Rural No 18.8 (14.2, 24.6) 12 (1, 78) 12 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.2)
Marion County Rural No 13.0 (9.8, 17.0) 69 (15, 86) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.0, -0.9)
Highland County Rural No 19.2 (14.4, 25.2) 11 (2, 74) 11 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.4)
Logan County Rural No 16.5 (12.3, 21.8) 32 (3, 83) 11 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.9, -0.7)
Ottawa County Urban No 16.0 (11.8, 21.6) 36 (4, 84) 11 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.7, -0.9)
Williams County Rural No 19.8 (14.8, 26.3) 8 (1, 72) 11 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.7, 0.0)
Brown County Urban No 18.6 (13.8, 24.7) 16 (1, 79) 10 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.2, -0.6)
Crawford County Rural No 17.0 (12.6, 22.6) 28 (3, 82) 10 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.1, -1.3)
Preble County Rural No 17.8 (13.1, 23.7) 24 (2, 80) 10 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.3)
Adams County Rural No 27.1 (19.9, 36.2) 2 (1, 38) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.7, 1.0)
Fayette County Rural No 27.7 (20.4, 37.0) 1 (1, 34) 10 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.4)
Auglaize County Rural No 16.0 (11.7, 21.6) 35 (4, 85) 10 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.7, -1.5)
Defiance County Rural No 18.8 (13.7, 25.3) 13 (1, 80) 10 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.6, 0.8)
Mercer County Rural No 16.8 (12.2, 22.6) 29 (3, 83) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.1, -0.4)
Champaign County Rural No 17.9 (13.0, 24.1) 23 (2, 82) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.1, -0.3)
Clinton County Rural No 16.3 (11.9, 22.0) 33 (4, 84) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.0)
Athens County Rural No 14.7 (10.6, 19.8) 51 (7, 86) 9 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.5, -0.6)
Madison County Urban No 17.3 (12.6, 23.2) 26 (3, 84) 9 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.0, -0.9)
Jackson County Rural No 22.1 (15.9, 29.9) 5 (1, 70) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.0, -0.4)
Van Wert County Rural No 23.6 (16.9, 32.1) 4 (1, 70) 9 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Morrow County Urban No 17.3 (12.4, 23.6) 25 (2, 84) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.1)
Union County Urban No 13.2 (9.4, 18.0) 67 (10, 86) 8 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.6, -1.3)
Fulton County Urban No 13.9 (9.8, 19.3) 60 (7, 86) 8 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.7, 1.6)
Henry County Rural No 19.4 (13.7, 27.0) 9 (1, 82) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.3)
Guernsey County Rural No 13.9 (9.6, 19.6) 59 (7, 86) 7 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.4, -0.6)
Hardin County Rural No 20.8 (14.5, 28.9) 7 (1, 80) 7 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.2)
Hocking County Urban No 19.3 (13.1, 27.6) 10 (1, 83) 7 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.6, -1.4)
Pike County Rural No 18.8 (12.9, 26.7) 14 (1, 83) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.5, 0.5)
Coshocton County Rural No 12.2 (8.3, 17.7) 73 (10, 86) 6 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.6, 0.1)
Gallia County Rural No 15.4 (10.4, 22.1) 43 (3, 86) 6 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.0, -1.2)
Perry County Urban No 13.4 (8.9, 19.6) 66 (6, 86) 6 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.0, -0.9)
Holmes County Rural No 10.3 (6.5, 15.4) 82 (21, 86) 5 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.6, -0.7)
Vinton County Rural No 27.0 (17.0, 41.3) 3 (1, 79) 5
*
*
Paulding County Rural No 17.9 (11.3, 27.4) 20 (1, 86) 5 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.3, 0.1)
Carroll County Urban No 10.7 (6.6, 16.9) 80 (14, 86) 4 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.6, -1.0)
Putnam County Rural Yes 8.7 (5.4, 13.6) 86 (34, 86) 4 falling falling trend -3.3 (-5.0, -1.9)
Wyandot County Rural No 14.7 (9.0, 23.1) 50 (2, 86) 4 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.9, 0.3)
Harrison County Rural No 18.3 (10.7, 29.9) 17 (1, 86) 4 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.3, 0.7)
Monroe County Rural No 17.9 (10.2, 29.9) 22 (1, 86) 4
*
*
Noble County Rural No 11.1 (6.2, 20.0) 79 (8, 86) 3
*
*
Meigs County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morgan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/13/2024 3:34 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.

* 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