Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages

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
Oklahoma N/A No 176.3 (174.4, 178.2) N/A 6,851 falling falling trend -0.8 (-0.9, -0.6)
United States N/A No 151.2 (151.0, 151.4) N/A 464,032 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -1.0)
Adair County Rural No 207.2 (175.0, 244.8) 18 (2, 66) 31 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Alfalfa County Rural No 186.6 (145.2, 238.5) 36 (2, 77) 14 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.9, 2.8)
Atoka County Rural No 187.5 (158.4, 221.3) 35 (6, 75) 31 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.7, 2.4)
Beaver County Rural No 153.7 (112.8, 209.1) 68 (9, 77) 10 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.3, 0.6)
Beckham County Rural No 193.7 (168.6, 221.8) 28 (6, 68) 44 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.4, 0.7)
Blaine County Rural No 232.1 (190.6, 281.3) 7 (1, 60) 24 stable stable trend 0.9 (-10.6, 10.3)
Bryan County Rural No 188.5 (171.5, 207.0) 34 (13, 63) 95 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.2)
Caddo County Rural No 216.3 (190.2, 245.5) 13 (2, 51) 51 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 0.6)
Canadian County Urban No 151.9 (142.9, 161.4) 70 (55, 76) 217 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.5)
Carter County Rural No 203.1 (185.6, 222.0) 22 (7, 50) 103 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Cherokee County Rural No 179.6 (161.2, 199.9) 47 (17, 71) 75 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Choctaw County Rural No 181.2 (151.7, 216.0) 45 (7, 76) 29 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.3)
Cimarron County Rural No 146.7 (87.3, 242.0) 74 (1, 77) 4 rising rising trend 58.2 (31.0, 106.7)
Cleveland County Urban No 151.5 (144.9, 158.3) 72 (58, 76) 415 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.2)
Coal County Rural No 243.4 (191.4, 308.2) 4 (1, 63) 16 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.5, 2.8)
Comanche County Urban No 183.5 (170.9, 196.8) 40 (21, 61) 164 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.4)
Cotton County Urban No 207.0 (161.1, 264.6) 20 (1, 75) 14 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.5, 2.6)
Craig County Rural No 177.6 (149.1, 211.0) 49 (9, 76) 29 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.5)
Creek County Urban No 185.6 (172.8, 199.3) 37 (17, 59) 162 falling falling trend -7.1 (-12.3, -1.4)
Custer County Rural No 170.3 (147.8, 195.4) 55 (17, 76) 44 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 0.7)
Delaware County Rural No 155.8 (140.8, 172.6) 66 (42, 77) 92 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Dewey County Rural No 191.9 (142.0, 255.6) 30 (1, 77) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.7, 1.0)
Ellis County Rural No 159.0 (111.5, 222.9) 63 (4, 77) 8 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.0, 3.1)
Garfield County Urban No 182.3 (167.7, 197.9) 43 (18, 64) 125 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.3)
Garvin County Rural No 213.7 (190.0, 240.0) 14 (2, 50) 62 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.8, 1.3)
Grady County Urban No 172.8 (158.3, 188.4) 53 (24, 71) 110 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Grant County Rural No 232.0 (175.3, 303.1) 9 (1, 73) 13 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.8, 2.7)
Greer County Rural No 173.5 (130.5, 228.5) 52 (3, 77) 11 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Harmon County Rural No 169.7 (98.1, 284.0) 56 (1, 77) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-6.1, 1.3)
Harper County Rural No 141.0 (97.6, 205.9) 77 (12, 77) 7 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.5, 0.0)
Haskell County Rural No 232.0 (196.7, 272.9) 8 (1, 51) 33 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.4, 0.7)
Hughes County Rural No 206.0 (173.1, 244.3) 21 (2, 69) 29 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.7, 0.6)
Jackson County Rural No 169.1 (145.3, 196.0) 57 (17, 76) 38 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
Jefferson County Rural No 268.2 (211.7, 336.9) 1 (1, 52) 17 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.0, 2.3)
Johnston County Rural No 190.2 (154.8, 232.4) 32 (3, 75) 21 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Kay County Rural No 200.1 (183.0, 218.5) 25 (8, 55) 108 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.8, 0.1)
Kingfisher County Rural No 163.2 (136.3, 194.3) 60 (17, 77) 27 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Kiowa County Rural No 237.7 (195.7, 287.3) 6 (1, 53) 24 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.8, 2.2)
Latimer County Rural No 178.0 (145.5, 217.8) 48 (6, 76) 22 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Le Flore County Rural No 211.5 (193.9, 230.4) 17 (4, 44) 113 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.3)
Lincoln County Urban No 185.4 (167.4, 205.1) 38 (13, 65) 81 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.6, -0.1)
Logan County Urban No 155.1 (140.4, 171.1) 67 (44, 77) 87 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Love County Rural No 231.1 (191.6, 277.4) 10 (1, 55) 26 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.2, 7.6)
Major County Rural No 143.6 (112.2, 182.5) 76 (26, 77) 15 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.1, 1.3)
Marshall County Rural No 193.2 (166.8, 223.8) 29 (6, 71) 41 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.1)
Mayes County Rural No 181.7 (163.8, 201.4) 44 (17, 68) 80 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.2)
McClain County Urban No 167.8 (150.7, 186.4) 59 (28, 75) 74 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.4)
McCurtain County Rural No 217.8 (194.7, 243.4) 12 (2, 44) 68 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
McIntosh County Rural No 190.2 (167.0, 216.8) 31 (8, 69) 54 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
Murray County Rural No 180.9 (152.7, 213.8) 46 (8, 76) 32 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.4)
Muskogee County Rural No 199.3 (183.5, 216.2) 27 (9, 51) 125 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Noble County Rural No 160.0 (132.5, 192.7) 62 (20, 77) 24 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.9, 0.5)
Nowata County Rural No 246.3 (205.0, 294.8) 3 (1, 48) 26 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.5, 10.5)
Okfuskee County Rural No 242.7 (202.2, 290.1) 5 (1, 47) 27 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.2, 3.1)
Oklahoma County Urban No 174.4 (169.7, 179.2) 51 (39, 60) 1,088 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.4)
Okmulgee County Urban No 199.7 (179.6, 221.8) 26 (6, 59) 76 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Osage County Urban No 172.0 (155.7, 189.7) 54 (25, 73) 88 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Ottawa County Rural No 213.6 (191.1, 238.3) 15 (3, 47) 69 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.0)
Pawnee County Urban No 182.9 (156.3, 213.5) 41 (8, 74) 35 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.6)
Payne County Rural No 184.8 (170.5, 200.0) 39 (18, 61) 130 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.0, 0.5)
Pittsburg County Rural No 212.2 (194.5, 231.3) 16 (5, 42) 113 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.8, 0.6)
Pontotoc County Rural No 151.7 (134.7, 170.5) 71 (43, 77) 61 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.6)
Pottawatomie County Rural No 200.8 (186.7, 215.8) 23 (9, 48) 156 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.4, 0.4)
Pushmataha County Rural No 218.3 (183.8, 258.8) 11 (1, 61) 31 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.0, 0.8)
Roger Mills County Rural No 147.7 (101.7, 211.9) 73 (5, 77) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.2, 2.6)
Rogers County Urban No 168.5 (157.4, 180.2) 58 (35, 71) 179 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Seminole County Rural No 200.4 (175.7, 228.0) 24 (5, 63) 50 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.5)
Sequoyah County Urban No 251.6 (230.0, 274.9) 2 (1, 16) 105 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.0)
Stephens County Rural No 189.0 (172.8, 206.5) 33 (13, 60) 108 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Texas County Rural No 207.1 (172.1, 248.0) 19 (2, 70) 27 stable stable trend 1.1 (-0.8, 3.0)
Tillman County Rural No 182.8 (141.2, 235.9) 42 (2, 77) 14 stable stable trend 1.4 (-1.7, 13.2)
Tulsa County Urban No 158.8 (154.2, 163.5) 65 (54, 72) 951 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.1)
Wagoner County Urban No 153.3 (141.8, 165.7) 69 (49, 77) 137 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.5)
Washington County Rural No 177.1 (162.4, 193.0) 50 (23, 69) 117 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.3)
Washita County Rural No 146.7 (118.2, 180.8) 75 (27, 77) 20 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.5)
Woods County Rural No 158.9 (125.8, 199.0) 64 (13, 77) 17 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.4)
Woodward County Rural No 160.2 (137.5, 185.9) 61 (25, 77) 37 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.0)

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/23/2026 9:56 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 (20 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85-89, 90+).

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.

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.

Healthy People 2030 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Φ Rural–urban county classifications are based on the 2023 USDA Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (except for Connecticut Counties which use 2013 codes). State-level cancer rates for rural areas are calculated using cancer cases registered exclusively in rural counties, while state-level cancer rates for urban areas are calculated using cases registered exclusively in urban counties.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top