Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Tennessee by County

Colon & Rectum, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Name
County
 sort alphabetically by name 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
Tennessee No 14.8 (14.4, 15.1) N/A 1,219 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.8)
United States No 13.1 (13.1, 13.2) N/A 52,152 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.1, -1.8)
Anderson County No 15.8 (12.6, 19.7) 42 (10, 77) 18 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.8)
Bedford County No 17.5 (12.9, 23.3) 28 (4, 77) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Benton County No 16.1 (9.7, 25.9) 37 (2, 82) 4 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.7, 2.1)
Blount County No 12.3 (10.2, 14.9) 72 (36, 81) 24 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.3)
Bradley County No 12.4 (9.8, 15.4) 71 (30, 82) 17 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.9, -0.4)
Campbell County No 12.8 (8.8, 18.1) 66 (14, 82) 7 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.3)
Cannon County No 21.7 (13.1, 34.3) 10 (1, 82) 4 stable stable trend 0.9 (-1.1, 2.9)
Carroll County No 22.4 (16.2, 30.4) 8 (1, 62) 9 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.1)
Carter County No 13.2 (9.9, 17.3) 62 (19, 82) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.1, -0.6)
Cheatham County No 17.5 (12.3, 24.3) 27 (3, 80) 8 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.5, 0.1)
Chester County No 25.7 (16.6, 38.1) 4 (1, 73) 5 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.0, 1.4)
Claiborne County No 17.2 (12.1, 24.0) 31 (3, 81) 8 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.5)
Cocke County No 9.9 (6.3, 14.9) 79 (28, 82) 5 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.5, -1.6)
Coffee County No 15.8 (11.9, 20.7) 41 (7, 79) 11 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.5, 0.1)
Crockett County No 26.5 (17.0, 39.9) 2 (1, 71) 5
*
*
Cumberland County No 9.7 (7.1, 13.2) 80 (45, 82) 12 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.5, -1.1)
Davidson County No 15.3 (14.0, 16.8) 48 (25, 62) 101 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.2, -1.4)
DeKalb County No 18.7 (11.8, 28.4) 22 (1, 82) 5 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.1)
Dickson County No 17.0 (12.6, 22.4) 33 (5, 78) 11 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.6)
Dyer County No 13.6 (9.3, 19.3) 59 (10, 82) 7 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.2)
Fayette County No 12.8 (9.1, 17.7) 65 (14, 82) 8
*
*
Fentress County No 20.1 (12.9, 30.3) 14 (1, 79) 5 stable stable trend 6.7 (-3.1, 17.6)
Franklin County No 11.8 (8.0, 17.0) 77 (19, 82) 7 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.1)
Gibson County No 13.8 (10.1, 18.6) 54 (14, 82) 9 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.5)
Giles County No 12.6 (8.3, 18.7) 68 (12, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.1, 1.3)
Grainger County No 11.8 (7.2, 18.8) 76 (11, 82) 4 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.3)
Greene County No 15.5 (12.2, 19.5) 47 (11, 78) 16 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.5, -0.8)
Grundy County No 19.4 (10.6, 33.0) 16 (1, 82) 3
*
*
Hamblen County No 14.9 (11.5, 19.1) 52 (12, 79) 13 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.9)
Hamilton County No 12.5 (11.1, 14.0) 69 (44, 78) 59 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.2, -1.9)
Hardeman County No 22.7 (16.0, 31.6) 7 (1, 70) 8 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.3)
Hardin County No 12.0 (7.7, 18.2) 74 (13, 82) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.2, 0.8)
Hawkins County No 17.0 (13.0, 21.8) 34 (5, 75) 14 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.5)
Haywood County No 19.2 (11.7, 30.0) 19 (1, 82) 4 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.4, 1.4)
Henderson County No 19.7 (13.4, 27.9) 15 (1, 78) 7 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.1, 0.8)
Henry County No 19.3 (14.0, 26.2) 18 (2, 75) 10 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.2)
Hickman County No 11.8 (7.1, 18.9) 75 (12, 82) 4
*
*
Houston County No 30.5 (18.2, 49.4) 1 (1, 75) 4
*
*
Humphreys County No 13.0 (7.5, 21.4) 63 (6, 82) 3 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.2, -0.8)
Jackson County No 15.6 (9.0, 26.8) 45 (2, 82) 3
*
*
Jefferson County No 11.2 (8.1, 15.3) 78 (28, 82) 9 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.7, -1.7)
Johnson County No 14.9 (9.1, 23.9) 51 (4, 82) 4
*
*
Knox County No 12.0 (10.7, 13.4) 73 (50, 79) 66 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.7, -1.7)
Lauderdale County No 22.7 (15.8, 31.7) 6 (1, 72) 7 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Lawrence County No 13.8 (9.8, 19.1) 56 (10, 82) 8 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.7, -1.2)
Lincoln County No 18.9 (13.6, 25.8) 21 (2, 76) 9 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.2)
Loudon County No 9.3 (6.4, 13.2) 81 (45, 82) 8 falling falling trend -3.9 (-5.1, -2.8)
Macon County No 19.0 (12.4, 28.0) 20 (1, 82) 5 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.3)
Madison County No 12.9 (10.2, 16.2) 64 (25, 81) 16 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.2)
Marion County No 17.9 (12.3, 25.3) 26 (2, 80) 7 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.4)
Marshall County No 13.6 (9.0, 19.8) 58 (9, 82) 6 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.9, -1.0)
Maury County No 15.3 (12.1, 19.1) 49 (13, 78) 17 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.6)
McMinn County No 19.4 (15.2, 24.6) 17 (3, 64) 15 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.3)
McNairy County No 17.0 (11.6, 24.5) 32 (2, 81) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.2)
Meigs County No 21.7 (12.8, 35.2) 9 (1, 82) 4
*
*
Monroe County No 15.8 (11.8, 20.9) 40 (7, 79) 11 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.0, 0.6)
Montgomery County No 20.8 (17.6, 24.4) 11 (3, 42) 31 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Morgan County No 14.5 (8.9, 22.8) 53 (4, 82) 4
*
*
Obion County No 13.8 (9.3, 20.0) 57 (8, 82) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.4, -0.3)
Overton County No 25.8 (17.9, 36.1) 3 (1, 57) 8 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.0, -0.1)
Polk County No 20.4 (12.8, 31.3) 12 (1, 81) 5
*
*
Putnam County No 15.8 (12.4, 19.9) 39 (10, 76) 15 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Rhea County No 17.4 (12.1, 24.4) 30 (3, 80) 7 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.5, 0.0)
Roane County No 15.6 (12.1, 20.1) 44 (9, 78) 14 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.2)
Robertson County No 13.3 (10.0, 17.5) 61 (18, 82) 11 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.2, -0.9)
Rutherford County No 15.0 (13.0, 17.3) 50 (21, 69) 42 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.7)
Scott County No 18.5 (12.0, 27.5) 24 (1, 81) 5 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.4, 0.8)
Sevier County No 18.6 (15.4, 22.3) 23 (5, 57) 25 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.2)
Shelby County No 16.3 (15.1, 17.4) 36 (22, 52) 163 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.4, -1.7)
Smith County No 15.9 (9.4, 25.3) 38 (2, 82) 4
*
*
Stewart County No 22.8 (14.4, 35.2) 5 (1, 77) 5
*
*
Sullivan County No 12.5 (10.5, 14.7) 70 (37, 80) 31 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.7)
Sumner County No 13.8 (11.7, 16.2) 55 (27, 77) 31 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.2, -0.8)
Tipton County No 18.0 (13.7, 23.3) 25 (4, 74) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Unicoi County No 15.5 (9.7, 24.3) 46 (3, 82) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.4, 1.4)
Warren County No 15.8 (11.1, 21.7) 43 (5, 81) 8 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.1, -0.9)
Washington County No 13.5 (11.2, 16.3) 60 (26, 79) 24 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -0.9)
Wayne County No 17.5 (10.7, 27.6) 29 (1, 82) 4
*
*
Weakley County No 20.3 (14.8, 27.3) 13 (1, 71) 9 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.6, -0.3)
White County No 16.8 (11.4, 24.1) 35 (3, 82) 6 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.9, -1.7)
Williamson County No 9.3 (7.7, 11.2) 82 (64, 82) 24 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.9, -2.1)
Wilson County No 12.7 (10.4, 15.5) 67 (30, 81) 21 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.7, -1.5)
Bledsoe County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Decatur County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hancock County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lewis County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Moore County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pickett County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sequatchie County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trousdale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Van Buren County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/29/2022 3:55 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