Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <65

Sorted by Rate
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 ascending
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 Yes 60.6 (59.5, 61.7) N/A 2,495 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.1, -1.0)
United States Yes 47.3 (47.2, 47.4) N/A 168,038 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.6, -2.0)
Ellis County Yes 94.5 (57.2, 150.2) 1 (1, 71) 4
*
*
Grant County Yes 91.1 (53.6, 146.1) 2 (1, 71) 4 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.3, 3.0)
Okfuskee County Yes 90.4 (68.7, 117.5) 3 (1, 56) 12 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.4, 3.1)
Garvin County Yes 87.9 (72.5, 105.9) 4 (1, 40) 25 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.3, 0.6)
Love County Yes 84.5 (60.8, 114.9) 5 (1, 65) 9 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.5, 1.4)
Blaine County Yes 82.4 (58.2, 113.9) 6 (1, 69) 9 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.1, 1.7)
McCurtain County Yes 80.3 (66.7, 96.0) 7 (1, 52) 27 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Sequoyah County Yes 79.6 (68.1, 92.7) 8 (1, 44) 37 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.3)
Greer County Yes 79.0 (50.4, 119.6) 9 (1, 71) 5 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.7, 2.4)
Ottawa County Yes 77.1 (63.8, 92.5) 10 (1, 55) 26 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Seminole County Yes 76.0 (61.2, 93.5) 11 (1, 62) 20 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.3, 0.5)
Murray County Yes 75.2 (55.7, 99.7) 12 (1, 69) 11 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.4)
Tillman County Yes 75.0 (49.9, 109.5) 13 (1, 71) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.2)
Marshall County Yes 74.7 (57.5, 96.0) 14 (1, 67) 14 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Cherokee County Yes 74.2 (63.4, 86.5) 15 (3, 55) 36 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.5, 1.0)
Pittsburg County Yes 74.2 (63.2, 86.7) 16 (3, 54) 36 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.5)
Muskogee County Yes 74.2 (65.3, 84.1) 17 (3, 48) 55 falling falling trend -0.5 (-0.9, -0.1)
Beckham County Yes 74.2 (59.0, 92.2) 18 (1, 64) 17 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7)
Kiowa County Yes 74.1 (50.4, 105.9) 19 (1, 71) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.4, 1.6)
Nowata County Yes 74.0 (52.7, 101.9) 20 (1, 70) 9 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.3)
Okmulgee County Yes 72.5 (60.7, 86.0) 21 (2, 59) 30 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Major County Yes 72.3 (46.2, 108.3) 22 (1, 71) 6
*
*
Caddo County Yes 71.6 (58.5, 86.9) 23 (2, 66) 22 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.3, 0.5)
Creek County Yes 70.4 (62.1, 79.5) 24 (6, 54) 57 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Stephens County Yes 70.0 (59.2, 82.4) 25 (4, 61) 34 stable stable trend -10.4 (-30.7, 15.7)
Atoka County Yes 69.8 (51.6, 92.9) 26 (1, 70) 11 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.6, 2.2)
Mayes County Yes 69.8 (58.8, 82.4) 27 (4, 62) 32 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.5)
McIntosh County Yes 69.2 (54.2, 87.7) 28 (2, 68) 17 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.3)
Carter County Yes 69.2 (59.2, 80.4) 29 (5, 60) 38 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.2)
Bryan County Yes 68.8 (58.4, 80.6) 30 (5, 63) 33 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Washington County Yes 68.0 (58.1, 79.3) 31 (6, 62) 38 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 0.8)
Craig County Yes 67.5 (50.2, 89.5) 32 (2, 71) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.1)
Cotton County Yes 67.1 (40.5, 106.3) 33 (1, 71) 4
*
*
Hughes County Yes 66.4 (48.9, 88.9) 34 (2, 71) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.0)
Kay County Yes 66.2 (55.6, 78.4) 35 (6, 65) 31 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.3)
Pawnee County Yes 66.1 (50.2, 85.8) 36 (2, 70) 13 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.2, -0.1)
Washita County Yes 65.8 (45.4, 92.6) 37 (1, 71) 8 stable stable trend 10.9 (-2.1, 25.7)
Le Flore County Yes 65.3 (55.6, 76.2) 38 (8, 64) 35 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.5)
Pottawatomie County Yes 64.9 (57.0, 73.7) 39 (12, 63) 52 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.2)
Jefferson County Yes 64.5 (37.5, 104.2) 40 (1, 71) 4 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.6, 2.4)
Pushmataha County Yes 63.6 (45.3, 88.0) 41 (2, 71) 9 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.9)
Jackson County Yes 63.6 (50.0, 79.7) 42 (5, 70) 16 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.9, 1.0)
Adair County Yes 63.3 (49.6, 79.9) 43 (5, 70) 15 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -1.0)
Lincoln County Yes 63.2 (52.2, 76.1) 44 (8, 69) 26 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.4)
Delaware County Yes 62.5 (52.3, 74.4) 45 (8, 68) 31 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.8)
Payne County Yes 62.5 (53.7, 72.4) 46 (11, 67) 39 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.1)
Johnston County Yes 62.4 (43.0, 88.1) 47 (2, 71) 7 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.0, -0.1)
Custer County Yes 60.8 (47.3, 76.8) 48 (6, 71) 15 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.1)
Osage County Yes 60.7 (51.1, 71.7) 49 (14, 69) 33 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.4, -0.1)
Haskell County Yes 60.5 (42.8, 83.6) 50 (2, 71) 9 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.3)
Garfield County Yes 60.1 (51.5, 69.8) 51 (15, 68) 38 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.2)
Pontotoc County Yes 58.5 (47.8, 71.0) 52 (13, 70) 22 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.4)
Grady County Yes 58.5 (50.1, 68.0) 53 (20, 69) 38 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Comanche County Yes 58.0 (51.8, 64.9) 54 (26, 67) 67 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Noble County Yes 57.6 (40.1, 81.1) 55 (4, 71) 8 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.1, 0.7)
Oklahoma County Yes 57.5 (55.1, 60.0) 56 (41, 62) 457 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.5, -1.2)
Coal County Yes 57.0 (33.6, 92.7) 57 (1, 71) 4
*
*
Logan County Yes 56.4 (47.4, 66.7) 58 (21, 71) 31 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
McClain County Yes 56.0 (46.2, 67.5) 59 (20, 71) 24 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.2)
Tulsa County Yes 55.8 (53.2, 58.5) 60 (43, 65) 372 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.2)
Texas County Yes 55.7 (41.8, 72.8) 61 (10, 71) 11 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.3)
Latimer County Yes 55.7 (37.4, 80.7) 62 (3, 71) 7 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.3)
Choctaw County Yes 55.2 (40.2, 74.6) 63 (7, 71) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
Woods County Yes 54.9 (34.5, 83.7) 64 (3, 71) 5 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.4, 0.4)
Cleveland County Yes 52.4 (48.5, 56.5) 65 (48, 69) 144 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.5)
Canadian County Yes 51.3 (46.2, 57.0) 66 (45, 71) 75 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Kingfisher County Yes 49.7 (34.9, 69.0) 67 (13, 71) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.5)
Rogers County Yes 49.1 (43.1, 55.8) 68 (47, 71) 52 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.3, -1.0)
Wagoner County Yes 48.8 (42.3, 56.2) 69 (45, 71) 43 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Woodward County Yes 46.6 (34.1, 62.4) 70 (26, 71) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.0, -0.4)
Alfalfa County Yes 41.4 (23.3, 71.2) 71 (14, 71) 3
*
*
Beaver County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cimarron County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dewey County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harmon County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harper County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Roger Mills County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 01/30/2023 9:51 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.

* 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