ZIP code
73134
in Oklahoma City, OklahomaPopulation 7,522
56.53/ 100
Ranked #7,729 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 24%)
Ranked #16 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 2.6%)
Ranked #14 of 105 Oklahoma City, OK ZIPs (top 13.4%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Physician access
9.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
2.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
13.6%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
0.57 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.71 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
0.85 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, ZIP 73134, one of several in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma ranks in the top 24% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,729th) and the top 2.6% of Oklahoma (16th).
Strengths and concerns sit side by side across the measures here: physicians resides in the top 0.4% nationally, and dental providers lands in the top 0.9% nationally. Outpatient registers in the top 0.9% nationally, and recreation sits in the top 3.1% nationally. Pharmacy rests in the top 4.0% nationally, lead in tap water is at the national minimum, and childcare stands in the top 5.1% nationally. Distance to an emergency room settles at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. On the other hand, homeownership lies in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and PFAS in drinking water resides at the national maximum.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, physicians runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 73013, just across the boundary.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Oklahoma City, OK metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 84%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 72%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 78%
11%
Disability
healthier than 69%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 56%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 43%
13%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 66%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Disability
healthier than 94%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 78%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 72%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 76%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
73013
Oklahomashares a border
Score 60.91
Closest healthier
73142
Oklahomashares a border
Score 60.34
Similar health profile
74133
Oklahoma95% similar profile
Score 54.35
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 22.4% | 20.6–24.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.5% | 29.1–34.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.8 |
| Depression among adults | 25.4% | 22.8–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.1% | 8.0–10.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 31.9% | 29.4–34.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.6% | 30.2–37.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.4% | 9.6–15.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.9% | 7.5–10.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 72.8% | 70.5–74.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.5% | 74.7–80.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.6% | 81.7–85.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.1% | 61.3–70.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.2% | 61.7–68.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.1% | 71.2–83.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.8% | 13.6–18.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–12.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.8% | 20.9–26.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.2% | 29.8–38.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.2% | 13.4–17.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.4% | 15.6–19.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.5% | 13.9–17.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.6% | 30.6–36.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–9.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.5% | 11.0–14.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.1% | 21.0–27.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.5% | 12.4–16.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 9.4–13.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.8% | 11.0–14.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 7.4–9.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.8% | 28.9–36.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.8–10.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 13.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 50.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 13.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 29.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $66,307 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $228,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,345 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $839 ($628–$1,136) n=546 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.5 yr ± 0.95 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.2 yr (73.6–81.3) n=638 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 0.95 years of 77.5, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured