ZIP code
74104
in Tulsa, OklahomaPopulation 12,806
46.26/ 100
Ranked #21,035 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 34%)
Ranked #123 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #19 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (top 22%)
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
9.1 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 ›Outpatient-care access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.73 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
3.0%
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Walkability
150 intersections/sq mi
in the top 4.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
30.4%
in the bottom 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 74104, one of several in Tulsa, Oklahoma, by its overall standing, sits in the bottom 34% nationally (21,035th) and the top 19% of Oklahoma (123rd).
The profile opens on the burdens that define it most: modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 2.5% nationally, slow internet speeds rests in the top 3.9% nationally, and modeled air-toxics cancer risk lies in the top 4.5% nationally. Modeled tree cover sits at the national minimum. More positively, physicians settles in the top 0.4% nationally, and outpatient registers in the top 1.1% nationally. Pharmacy stands in the top 2.2% nationally, and floodplain exposure lands at the national minimum. Walkability is in the top 4.8% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol resides in the bottom 3.9% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, physicians runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 74114, 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 Tulsa, 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 87%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 34%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 67%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 2%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 13%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 99%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Disability
healthier than 76%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.00%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 50%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 17%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
“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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 3.7 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 86.5 — 83 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,402 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
74110
Oklahomashares a border
Score 20.89
Closest healthier
74114
Oklahomashares a border
Score 57.50
Similar health profile
72701
Arkansas99% similar profile
Score 45.61
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 | 19.3% | 17.5–21.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.1% | 26.8–31.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.7% | 10.5–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.9 |
| Depression among adults | 30.2% | 27.4–33.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.9% | 7.9–10.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 30.4% | 28.0–33.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.8% | 30.1–37.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.4–2.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.2% | 11.9–16.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.5% | 9.8–13.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.6% | 66.1–71.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.5% | 70.5–76.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 78.2% | 75.6–80.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.9% | 57.9–65.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.9% | 53.9–59.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.1% | 65.7–77.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.2% | 13.1–17.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.6% | 11.8–15.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.2% | 25.3–31.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.1% | 31.4–38.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.3% | 17.3–21.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.6% | 18.6–22.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.5% | 11.1–14.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.6% | 17.5–21.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 37.9% | 34.6–41.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.6% | 11.3–14.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.6% | 22.3–28.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.4% | 17.8–23.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.2% | 14.8–20.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.0% | 13.0–17.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.5% | 33.3–41.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 10.0–13.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 18.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 49.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 37.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 48.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 11.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 47.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 12.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 30.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $54,691 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $246,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,135 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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