Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2015-2019

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

Sorted by Name
County
 sort alphabetically by name descending
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 *** 48.7 (47.8, 49.6) N/A 2,305 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.0, -2.1)
United States *** 36.7 (36.6, 36.8) N/A 146,023 falling falling trend -4.9 (-5.2, -4.5)
Adair County *** 52.1 (40.8, 65.9) 38 (3, 68) 15 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.7)
Alfalfa County *** 41.4 (24.9, 67.0) 63 (3, 70) 4 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.7, 2.2)
Atoka County *** 57.9 (44.2, 75.2) 16 (1, 66) 12 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.1, 0.6)
Beckham County *** 47.9 (36.3, 62.2) 47 (5, 69) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Blaine County *** 36.4 (23.6, 54.6) 66 (16, 70) 5 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.7)
Bryan County *** 48.2 (40.8, 56.7) 46 (16, 67) 31 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Caddo County *** 55.6 (45.4, 67.6) 27 (3, 65) 21 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.2)
Canadian County *** 40.9 (36.3, 45.9) 64 (40, 69) 60 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.1)
Carter County *** 52.2 (44.4, 61.0) 36 (8, 63) 33 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.5)
Cherokee County *** 53.9 (45.8, 63.0) 32 (6, 61) 33 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
Choctaw County *** 55.9 (42.5, 72.8) 26 (1, 67) 12 falling falling trend -4.1 (-7.5, -0.7)
Cleveland County *** 40.8 (37.5, 44.3) 65 (47, 68) 116 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.9)
Coal County *** 52.2 (32.5, 81.3) 35 (1, 70) 4 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.2, 1.4)
Comanche County *** 50.1 (44.5, 56.2) 41 (15, 61) 60 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.3)
Cotton County *** 57.1 (36.9, 86.4) 23 (1, 70) 5 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.0, 2.3)
Craig County *** 65.6 (51.0, 83.6) 6 (1, 58) 14 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Creek County *** 57.8 (51.2, 65.2) 19 (4, 48) 57 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
Custer County *** 54.7 (43.5, 68.0) 29 (2, 66) 17 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Delaware County *** 45.3 (38.4, 53.3) 55 (22, 68) 34 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.2)
Garfield County *** 46.6 (39.9, 54.2) 49 (21, 67) 36 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.1)
Garvin County *** 57.3 (46.8, 69.7) 20 (2, 63) 21 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.1)
Grady County *** 49.2 (42.0, 57.4) 44 (12, 65) 34 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.7, -1.5)
Grant County *** 41.6 (23.7, 71.4) 62 (1, 70) 3
*
*
Greer County *** 56.6 (35.3, 87.4) 24 (1, 70) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.8, 1.8)
Haskell County *** 55.0 (40.6, 73.6) 28 (1, 68) 10 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.1)
Hughes County *** 58.5 (44.1, 76.7) 15 (1, 67) 11 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.3, 0.7)
Jackson County *** 51.9 (40.7, 65.3) 39 (3, 67) 15 falling falling trend -4.0 (-7.3, -0.7)
Jefferson County *** 53.7 (34.8, 81.1) 33 (1, 70) 5 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.7, 2.5)
Johnston County *** 54.4 (39.6, 73.7) 30 (1, 69) 9 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.5, -1.2)
Kay County *** 60.5 (52.1, 69.9) 12 (2, 47) 39 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.5)
Kingfisher County *** 42.8 (30.4, 58.7) 61 (9, 70) 8 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.5)
Kiowa County *** 68.9 (50.4, 92.9) 3 (1, 63) 9 stable stable trend 1.1 (-0.2, 2.4)
Latimer County *** 49.9 (35.9, 68.7) 43 (2, 70) 8 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.2, -1.5)
Le Flore County *** 56.6 (48.7, 65.4) 25 (3, 54) 38 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.8, -0.1)
Lincoln County *** 52.6 (43.7, 63.0) 34 (6, 66) 25 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.2)
Logan County *** 45.3 (37.7, 54.1) 54 (18, 68) 26 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.6)
Love County *** 71.6 (53.0, 95.2) 2 (1, 61) 10 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.3, 1.2)
Major County *** 31.4 (18.7, 50.9) 70 (23, 70) 4 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.8, 2.6)
Marshall County *** 68.1 (54.5, 84.6) 4 (1, 47) 18 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.6)
Mayes County *** 65.0 (55.8, 75.4) 8 (1, 39) 37 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.2)
McClain County *** 48.9 (40.2, 59.1) 45 (9, 67) 23 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.8, -0.5)
McCurtain County *** 64.1 (54.0, 75.9) 9 (1, 46) 29 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
McIntosh County *** 60.2 (48.9, 73.8) 13 (1, 58) 22 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Murray County *** 65.5 (49.8, 85.1) 7 (1, 62) 13 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.3)
Muskogee County *** 61.1 (54.0, 69.0) 11 (2, 42) 55 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.1)
Noble County *** 44.8 (31.5, 62.7) 57 (5, 70) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.8)
Nowata County *** 76.9 (58.3, 100.3) 1 (1, 45) 12 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.5, 1.3)
Okfuskee County *** 57.2 (42.0, 76.8) 22 (1, 68) 9 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.8, 1.6)
Oklahoma County *** 46.3 (44.2, 48.5) 52 (38, 59) 385 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Okmulgee County *** 57.9 (49.1, 68.0) 17 (2, 56) 31 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.3)
Osage County *** 46.4 (39.3, 54.6) 50 (21, 68) 32 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.6)
Ottawa County *** 67.1 (56.4, 79.4) 5 (1, 40) 29 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Pawnee County *** 54.1 (41.8, 69.5) 31 (2, 68) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.9, 0.7)
Payne County *** 46.0 (39.4, 53.5) 53 (20, 68) 36 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.2)
Pittsburg County *** 59.6 (51.4, 68.9) 14 (2, 49) 39 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Pontotoc County *** 50.5 (41.9, 60.4) 40 (8, 67) 25 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.2)
Pottawatomie County *** 57.9 (51.0, 65.5) 18 (4, 48) 52 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.1)
Pushmataha County *** 63.3 (48.3, 82.7) 10 (1, 63) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.1)
Rogers County *** 43.7 (38.4, 49.6) 58 (31, 68) 50 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
Seminole County *** 49.9 (39.7, 62.3) 42 (5, 68) 17 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.1)
Sequoyah County *** 57.3 (48.8, 67.0) 21 (3, 58) 33 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.3)
Stephens County *** 46.3 (38.9, 54.9) 51 (16, 68) 29 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.3, -1.7)
Texas County *** 36.4 (25.1, 50.8) 67 (23, 70) 7 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.8, -0.5)
Tillman County *** 44.9 (28.9, 67.8) 56 (2, 70) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.2, 1.5)
Tulsa County *** 42.9 (40.7, 45.1) 60 (46, 65) 308 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.2, -2.3)
Wagoner County *** 43.2 (37.5, 49.6) 59 (30, 68) 43 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -0.9)
Washington County *** 52.2 (45.0, 60.3) 37 (9, 63) 39 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.7, 0.7)
Washita County *** 33.8 (22.2, 50.1) 68 (23, 70) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.5, 1.7)
Woods County *** 47.0 (30.6, 69.8) 48 (1, 70) 5
*
*
Woodward County *** 33.0 (23.5, 45.2) 69 (38, 70) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.0, 0.2)
Beaver County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cimarron County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dewey County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ellis 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 09/21/2021 10:15 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 1969-2018 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.

* 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