Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 25.1?
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 No 46.5 (45.6, 47.3) N/A 2,245 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.5, -2.5)
United States No 35.0 (34.9, 35.0) N/A 142,497 falling falling trend -4.8 (-5.1, -4.6)
Blaine County No 31.7 (19.9, 48.9) 69 (26, 69) 5 falling falling trend -6.8 (-11.2, -2.2)
Major County No 33.2 (20.0, 53.2) 68 (13, 69) 4 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.6, 2.5)
Woodward County No 33.8 (24.3, 46.0) 67 (33, 69) 8 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.1)
Washita County No 35.3 (23.3, 51.9) 66 (18, 69) 6 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.8, 1.4)
Alfalfa County No 35.5 (20.2, 60.2) 65 (6, 69) 3 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.7, 2.0)
Texas County No 35.8 (24.7, 50.1) 64 (18, 69) 7 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.8, -0.7)
Cleveland County No 36.0 (33.0, 39.3) 63 (53, 69) 107 falling falling trend -5.2 (-8.1, -2.1)
Tillman County No 38.0 (23.4, 59.7) 62 (6, 69) 4 falling falling trend -9.1 (-15.7, -2.0)
Wagoner County No 38.2 (33.0, 44.1) 61 (41, 69) 40 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.7, -1.1)
Canadian County No 38.3 (34.0, 43.1) 60 (44, 68) 59 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.2)
Kingfisher County No 39.7 (28.0, 55.0) 59 (11, 69) 8 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.0, 1.1)
Osage County No 40.2 (33.8, 47.6) 58 (31, 68) 29 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.8)
Tulsa County No 40.2 (38.2, 42.4) 57 (47, 64) 296 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.5, -2.5)
Grant County No 42.0 (23.9, 72.2) 56 (1, 69) 3
*
*
Logan County No 42.5 (35.3, 50.8) 55 (24, 68) 26 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Delaware County No 42.7 (36.1, 50.4) 54 (24, 67) 33 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.3)
Garfield County No 43.1 (36.7, 50.3) 53 (24, 66) 34 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.0)
Pontotoc County No 43.2 (35.3, 52.5) 52 (18, 68) 21 stable stable trend -11.9 (-23.2, 0.9)
Rogers County No 43.3 (38.0, 49.1) 51 (29, 65) 51 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.2)
Beckham County No 43.7 (32.8, 57.3) 50 (8, 69) 11 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.6)
Oklahoma County No 43.8 (41.8, 45.9) 49 (39, 58) 372 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.3, -2.2)
Woods County No 44.3 (28.6, 66.3) 48 (2, 69) 5
*
*
Payne County No 44.6 (38.2, 51.8) 47 (22, 66) 36 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.1)
Latimer County No 47.1 (33.5, 65.4) 46 (2, 69) 8 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.1, -1.5)
Custer County No 47.1 (36.8, 59.6) 45 (7, 67) 15 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Comanche County No 47.8 (42.4, 53.7) 44 (19, 60) 58 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Jackson County No 47.8 (37.1, 60.8) 43 (7, 67) 14 falling falling trend -3.8 (-6.6, -0.9)
Stephens County No 48.2 (40.6, 57.0) 42 (10, 64) 30 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.1, -1.7)
Bryan County No 48.7 (41.2, 57.2) 41 (10, 62) 31 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.3)
Grady County No 48.8 (41.7, 56.8) 40 (11, 61) 35 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.4, -1.4)
Hughes County No 49.1 (36.0, 66.0) 39 (2, 68) 9 falling falling trend -15.0 (-26.1, -2.2)
Adair County No 49.6 (38.5, 63.0) 38 (5, 66) 14 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.8)
Washington County No 50.3 (43.3, 58.2) 37 (10, 58) 38 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.8, 0.5)
Seminole County No 50.3 (40.1, 62.5) 36 (5, 66) 17 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Coal County No 50.4 (31.3, 78.8) 35 (1, 69) 4 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.1)
Noble County No 50.4 (36.2, 69.1) 34 (1, 68) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.9)
McClain County No 50.7 (41.9, 60.9) 33 (6, 63) 24 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.5)
Lincoln County No 50.7 (42.2, 60.8) 32 (7, 62) 25 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Pawnee County No 51.3 (39.4, 66.2) 31 (3, 67) 13 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.9, 3.4)
Garvin County No 52.4 (42.3, 64.3) 30 (4, 62) 20 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Cherokee County No 52.7 (44.8, 61.6) 29 (6, 56) 33 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.5)
Cotton County No 52.8 (33.4, 81.4) 28 (1, 69) 5 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.1, 2.0)
Carter County No 54.0 (46.2, 62.9) 27 (5, 55) 35 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.4)
Pittsburg County No 54.1 (46.4, 62.9) 26 (5, 55) 36 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
Creek County No 54.9 (48.5, 61.9) 25 (6, 48) 55 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Choctaw County No 55.0 (41.9, 71.6) 24 (1, 65) 12 falling falling trend -3.4 (-6.4, -0.3)
Caddo County No 55.1 (45.0, 67.0) 23 (2, 60) 21 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.2, 1.0)
Jefferson County No 56.0 (36.6, 84.0) 22 (1, 69) 5 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.8, 2.2)
Pottawatomie County No 56.7 (50.0, 64.2) 21 (5, 44) 52 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.2, -0.1)
Kay County No 57.1 (49.0, 66.4) 20 (3, 49) 36 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.8, 0.4)
Okmulgee County No 57.4 (48.5, 67.5) 19 (2, 50) 31 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.3)
Craig County No 57.7 (44.3, 74.5) 18 (1, 63) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.4)
Johnston County No 57.8 (42.3, 77.8) 17 (1, 66) 9 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.2, -1.0)
Le Flore County No 58.5 (50.6, 67.5) 16 (3, 45) 40 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1)
Okfuskee County No 58.7 (43.4, 78.4) 15 (1, 65) 10 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.9, 1.4)
Muskogee County No 58.7 (51.8, 66.4) 14 (3, 43) 53 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.0)
Pushmataha County No 59.6 (45.1, 78.5) 13 (1, 63) 11 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.9, -0.3)
Mayes County No 60.4 (51.6, 70.4) 12 (1, 43) 35 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Sequoyah County No 60.4 (51.7, 70.3) 11 (2, 45) 35 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Marshall County No 60.7 (47.9, 76.5) 10 (1, 56) 16 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.4)
Atoka County No 62.3 (48.1, 80.0) 9 (1, 57) 13 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.4, 1.3)
Haskell County No 63.9 (48.4, 83.3) 8 (1, 56) 12 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.3)
McCurtain County No 64.0 (53.8, 75.8) 7 (1, 42) 29 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
McIntosh County No 66.9 (54.9, 81.4) 6 (1, 41) 24 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.0)
Kiowa County No 67.0 (48.4, 91.3) 5 (1, 63) 9 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.2, 2.3)
Love County No 67.8 (49.7, 91.0) 4 (1, 61) 10 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.3, 1.1)
Ottawa County No 70.1 (59.3, 82.5) 3 (1, 30) 31 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
Murray County No 71.4 (55.0, 91.5) 2 (1, 45) 14 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.9, 0.0)
Nowata County No 71.5 (53.6, 94.3) 1 (1, 51) 11 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.1)
Beaver County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cimarron County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dewey County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ellis County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greer 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 12/09/2022 5:19 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