Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

All Cancer Sites, 2014-2018

White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by CI*Rank
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of ***?
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 6, 7 *** 180.8 (178.9, 182.8) N/A 6,860 falling falling trend -0.7 (-0.8, -0.6)
United States 6 *** 160.2 (160.0, 160.4) N/A 465,913 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.1, -1.5)
Kiowa County 6, 7 *** 246.2 (204.0, 295.8) 1 (1, 50) 27
*
*
Okfuskee County 6, 7 *** 241.3 (202.4, 286.4) 2 (1, 50) 28
*
*
Harmon County 6, 7 *** 238.0 (156.0, 354.9) 3 (1, 77) 7
*
*
Garvin County 6, 7 *** 225.2 (201.8, 250.8) 4 (1, 39) 72
*
*
Love County 6, 7 *** 220.5 (182.9, 264.7) 5 (1, 65) 26
*
*
Sequoyah County 6, 7 *** 218.8 (199.1, 240.2) 6 (1, 39) 95 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.4, 0.9)
Le Flore County 6, 7 *** 217.9 (200.4, 236.6) 7 (1, 37) 122 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
McCurtain County 6, 7 *** 217.2 (194.9, 241.8) 8 (1, 47) 73 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.3)
Atoka County 6, 7 *** 216.9 (185.8, 252.6) 9 (1, 61) 36 rising rising trend 8.3 (0.1, 17.3)
Ottawa County 6, 7 *** 215.4 (193.5, 239.4) 10 (1, 49) 76 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Cotton County 6, 7 *** 215.2 (167.9, 273.5) 11 (1, 75) 15
*
*
Pittsburg County 6, 7 *** 214.5 (196.7, 233.7) 12 (2, 42) 114 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.6)
Choctaw County 6, 7 *** 214.3 (182.7, 250.8) 13 (1, 64) 35 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.9, 1.1)
Jefferson County 6, 7 *** 213.2 (168.7, 267.7) 14 (1, 74) 17 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.1, 2.1)
Coal County 6, 7 *** 212.7 (164.4, 273.3) 15 (1, 75) 15
*
*
Hughes County 6, 7 *** 210.7 (178.1, 248.7) 16 (1, 68) 31
*
*
Greer County 6, 7 *** 210.6 (165.1, 266.8) 17 (1, 74) 15
*
*
Seminole County 6, 7 *** 210.5 (186.2, 237.7) 18 (1, 57) 56
*
*
Nowata County 6, 7 *** 209.6 (173.5, 252.3) 19 (1, 72) 25 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.2, 1.6)
Custer County 6, 7 *** 206.5 (182.0, 233.5) 20 (2, 62) 54
*
*
Jackson County 6, 7 *** 203.5 (177.5, 232.6) 21 (2, 66) 46
*
*
Creek County 6, 7 *** 202.5 (188.6, 217.3) 22 (7, 49) 166
*
*
Tillman County 6, 7 *** 200.9 (158.1, 254.4) 23 (1, 75) 16
*
*
Haskell County 6, 7 *** 200.9 (169.2, 237.7) 24 (1, 73) 31 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.1, 0.3)
Beckham County 6, 7 *** 200.8 (175.1, 229.5) 25 (2, 68) 45
*
*
McClain County 6, 7 *** 200.6 (181.0, 221.8) 26 (4, 61) 80
*
*
Okmulgee County 6, 7 *** 199.5 (180.1, 220.8) 27 (4, 61) 82
*
*
Major County 6, 7 *** 199.0 (160.7, 244.8) 28 (1, 75) 21
*
*
Blaine County 6, 7 *** 196.9 (161.7, 238.7) 29 (1, 74) 23
*
*
Marshall County 6, 7 *** 196.5 (168.8, 228.5) 30 (2, 73) 41 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.4)
Kay County 6, 7 *** 196.0 (179.4, 214.0) 31 (8, 60) 110 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Latimer County 6, 7 *** 195.3 (161.4, 235.8) 32 (2, 74) 26
*
*
Muskogee County 6, 7 *** 195.2 (180.0, 211.5) 33 (10, 59) 127 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.3)
Ellis County 6, 7 *** 193.4 (144.7, 256.2) 34 (1, 77) 11
*
*
Pushmataha County 6, 7 *** 193.4 (163.4, 228.9) 35 (2, 73) 30 stable stable trend -1.5 (-4.0, 1.0)
Carter County 6, 7 *** 191.3 (174.4, 209.5) 36 (11, 65) 99
*
*
Murray County 6, 7 *** 190.0 (160.4, 224.2) 37 (3, 74) 32
*
*
Texas County 6, 7 *** 189.3 (159.1, 224.5) 38 (2, 74) 29 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.6)
Pottawatomie County 6, 7 *** 188.3 (174.5, 202.9) 39 (14, 64) 143 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Stephens County 6, 7 *** 188.1 (171.9, 205.5) 40 (12, 67) 106
*
*
Pawnee County 6, 7 *** 187.9 (161.0, 218.5) 41 (4, 74) 37
*
*
Caddo County 6, 7 *** 184.4 (162.2, 209.3) 42 (9, 73) 52
*
*
Adair County 6, 7 *** 184.4 (155.9, 217.6) 43 (4, 75) 31 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.1)
Oklahoma County 6, 7 *** 182.7 (177.9, 187.7) 44 (32, 57) 1,133 falling falling trend -0.7 (-0.9, -0.4)
Craig County 6, 7 *** 182.6 (154.2, 215.8) 45 (5, 75) 31
*
*
Lincoln County 6, 7 *** 182.5 (164.3, 202.5) 46 (14, 71) 77
*
*
Grady County 6, 7 *** 181.0 (165.7, 197.4) 47 (19, 70) 108
*
*
McIntosh County 6, 7 *** 180.6 (158.1, 206.4) 48 (10, 74) 52
*
*
Washington County 6, 7 *** 179.8 (164.9, 195.9) 49 (19, 71) 118
*
*
Cimarron County 6, 7 *** 179.1 (116.5, 274.4) 50 (1, 77) 6 stable stable trend 2.4 (-0.1, 5.0)
Comanche County 6, 7 *** 178.9 (166.3, 192.1) 51 (25, 70) 155 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Mayes County 6, 7 *** 178.7 (161.3, 197.7) 52 (18, 72) 82 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.4)
Kingfisher County 6, 7 *** 178.6 (151.4, 209.8) 53 (8, 75) 31
*
*
Grant County 6, 7 *** 177.7 (130.4, 238.6) 54 (1, 77) 11 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.9, 2.1)
Delaware County 6, 7 *** 177.5 (161.2, 195.4) 55 (20, 73) 104 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Washita County 6, 7 *** 176.0 (146.1, 210.8) 56 (6, 76) 26
*
*
Rogers County 6, 7 *** 175.2 (163.4, 187.8) 57 (30, 71) 168
*
*
Noble County 6, 7 *** 175.2 (145.6, 209.8) 58 (8, 76) 26
*
*
Osage County 6, 7 *** 174.4 (157.8, 192.7) 59 (24, 73) 87 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Garfield County 6, 7 *** 170.5 (156.6, 185.3) 60 (31, 74) 119
*
*
Tulsa County 6, 7 *** 170.4 (165.6, 175.4) 61 (47, 68) 977 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.0)
Pontotoc County 6, 7 *** 170.1 (152.2, 189.7) 62 (25, 74) 69
*
*
Johnston County 6, 7 *** 169.4 (138.7, 206.1) 63 (9, 76) 22
*
*
Dewey County 6, 7 *** 168.9 (128.1, 221.2) 64 (3, 77) 12
*
*
Woods County 6, 7 *** 167.0 (132.8, 208.2) 65 (8, 77) 18
*
*
Logan County 6, 7 *** 167.0 (150.6, 184.8) 66 (31, 75) 79
*
*
Cherokee County 6, 7 *** 166.3 (148.5, 186.0) 67 (28, 75) 69 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.1)
Bryan County 6, 7 *** 165.1 (149.6, 182.1) 68 (34, 75) 86 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -1.1)
Canadian County 6, 7 *** 163.1 (152.9, 173.8) 69 (47, 74) 198
*
*
Cleveland County 6, 7 *** 160.3 (153.0, 167.8) 70 (56, 74) 383 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.0)
Harper County 6, 7 *** 159.7 (110.1, 228.1) 71 (2, 77) 8
*
*
Payne County 6, 7 *** 158.0 (144.5, 172.4) 72 (47, 76) 107
*
*
Woodward County 6, 7 *** 154.5 (132.2, 179.8) 73 (32, 77) 35
*
*
Roger Mills County 6, 7 *** 152.0 (107.0, 213.2) 74 (4, 77) 8
*
*
Wagoner County 6, 7 *** 140.3 (128.6, 152.7) 75 (66, 77) 113
*
*
Alfalfa County 6, 7 *** 133.6 (100.9, 175.8) 76 (35, 77) 11 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.9, 1.8)
Beaver County 6, 7 *** 110.1 (76.2, 157.2) 77 (60, 77) 8 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.4, 1.0)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 05/18/2021 8:02 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 2020 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 1969-2017 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.

*** No Healthy People 2020 Objective for this cancer.
Healthy People 2020 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

6 Hispanic mortality recent trend data for the United States has been excluded for the following states: Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. The data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality for these states may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2018) and has been excluded from the calculation of the United States recent trend. This was based on the NCHS Policy.

7 Data on Hispanic and non-Hispanic mortality may be unreliable for the time period used in the generation of the recent trend (1990 - 2018) for this state and the user is cautioned against drawing conclusions from such data. This was based on the NCHS Policy.

* 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