Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Tennessee by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Recentaapc
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
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
Tennessee Yes 17.8 (17.3, 18.4) N/A 744 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.7)
United States Yes 14.9 (14.8, 15.0) N/A 29,891 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.6)
Roane County Yes 14.0 (8.6, 21.5) 51 (12, 53) 4 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.1, -1.1)
Gibson County Yes 17.6 (11.5, 25.7) 37 (6, 53) 5 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.9, -1.1)
Carter County Yes 20.7 (14.4, 28.9) 23 (3, 52) 7 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.7, -0.8)
Hamilton County Yes 15.5 (13.2, 18.0) 47 (26, 52) 34 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.6)
Jefferson County Yes 18.2 (12.1, 26.2) 36 (5, 53) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.5, -0.8)
Rutherford County Yes 15.1 (12.8, 17.6) 49 (28, 52) 32 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.9, -1.5)
Bradley County Yes 17.3 (13.1, 22.4) 40 (10, 53) 12 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.2)
Campbell County Yes 19.7 (12.6, 29.5) 26 (3, 53) 5 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.4, -0.8)
Putnam County Yes 13.6 (9.2, 19.3) 52 (20, 53) 6 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.6, -0.5)
Robertson County Yes 18.4 (13.2, 25.0) 33 (7, 53) 8 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.3, -0.9)
Shelby County Yes 18.3 (16.7, 19.9) 35 (20, 43) 105 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.7)
Davidson County Yes 15.3 (13.7, 17.1) 48 (30, 52) 68 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.5)
Williamson County Yes 11.0 (8.9, 13.6) 53 (45, 53) 19 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -1.0)
Wilson County Yes 14.3 (11.0, 18.1) 50 (24, 53) 13 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.0, -0.7)
Loudon County Yes 18.9 (12.3, 27.8) 30 (4, 53) 5 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.0)
Tipton County Yes 16.4 (11.1, 23.2) 44 (9, 53) 6 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.0)
Cumberland County Yes 22.1 (15.0, 31.3) 17 (2, 52) 6 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.3, 0.0)
Montgomery County Yes 16.0 (13.0, 19.4) 45 (21, 52) 21 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.7)
Hamblen County Yes 17.4 (12.0, 24.4) 39 (8, 53) 7 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.2)
Madison County Yes 19.7 (14.8, 25.7) 25 (6, 51) 11 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.4)
Washington County Yes 17.5 (13.5, 22.3) 38 (12, 52) 13 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.4)
Dyer County Yes 21.0 (13.3, 31.5) 22 (2, 53) 5 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.2)
McNairy County Yes 21.5 (12.3, 35.1) 21 (1, 53) 3 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.6)
Sumner County Yes 15.7 (12.7, 19.2) 46 (21, 52) 19 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.4)
Knox County Yes 16.9 (14.8, 19.2) 41 (21, 50) 48 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Bedford County Yes 24.0 (16.7, 33.1) 13 (1, 51) 7 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.5, 0.1)
Blount County Yes 16.6 (12.8, 21.1) 42 (15, 53) 13 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.2)
Lawrence County Yes 18.6 (11.8, 27.6) 32 (4, 53) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.3)
Henderson County Yes 29.6 (19.2, 43.8) 4 (1, 49) 5 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.8, 0.7)
Lincoln County Yes 16.5 (9.6, 26.6) 43 (5, 53) 3 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.5)
McMinn County Yes 19.0 (12.7, 27.2) 28 (4, 53) 6 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.4)
Maury County Yes 18.6 (14.0, 24.3) 31 (8, 52) 11 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.4)
Dickson County Yes 22.3 (15.6, 30.8) 16 (2, 51) 7 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.2)
Fayette County Yes 21.9 (14.1, 32.5) 18 (2, 53) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.6, 0.8)
Greene County Yes 21.9 (15.9, 29.3) 19 (3, 50) 9 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Sullivan County Yes 22.8 (18.6, 27.6) 15 (4, 39) 21 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.5, 0.0)
Coffee County Yes 25.4 (18.2, 34.3) 9 (1, 47) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.8)
Cheatham County Yes 24.3 (16.5, 34.6) 10 (1, 51) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.2)
Sevier County Yes 24.0 (18.7, 30.4) 12 (2, 42) 14 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.5)
Anderson County Yes 18.4 (13.2, 24.9) 34 (7, 53) 8 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Franklin County Yes 23.0 (15.1, 33.4) 14 (1, 52) 5 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.0, 1.7)
Hardin County Yes 20.6 (11.7, 33.8) 24 (1, 53) 3 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.5)
Morgan County Yes 27.2 (16.3, 42.8) 6 (1, 53) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.3, 2.2)
Benton County Yes 42.7 (25.9, 66.4) 1 (1, 38) 4 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.6, 1.8)
Claiborne County Yes 27.3 (17.8, 40.2) 5 (1, 49) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Overton County Yes 34.2 (21.6, 51.6) 2 (1, 47) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.3, 2.5)
Warren County Yes 21.7 (14.3, 31.5) 20 (2, 53) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.2, 1.5)
Hardeman County Yes 25.5 (15.5, 39.5) 8 (1, 52) 4 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.4, 2.1)
Hawkins County Yes 26.9 (19.5, 36.2) 7 (1, 44) 9 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.9, 1.6)
Monroe County Yes 31.1 (22.3, 42.3) 3 (1, 36) 8 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.9, 2.1)
Hickman County Yes 24.0 (14.4, 37.6) 11 (1, 53) 4
*
*
Marion County Yes 19.0 (11.0, 30.6) 29 (2, 53) 3
*
*
Weakley County Yes 19.5 (11.5, 30.8) 27 (2, 53) 4
*
*
Bledsoe County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cannon County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carroll County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chester County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cocke County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crockett County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
DeKalb County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Decatur County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fentress County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Giles County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grainger County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grundy County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hancock County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Haywood County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Henry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Houston County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Humphreys County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jackson County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Johnson County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lauderdale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lewis County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Macon County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Marshall County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Meigs County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Moore County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Obion County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pickett County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Polk County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rhea County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scott County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sequatchie County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Smith County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stewart County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trousdale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Unicoi County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Van Buren County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wayne County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
White County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/28/2022 2:33 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.

* 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.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

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