INTRODUCTION: Race and ethnicity disparities in health care can only be understood if race and ethnicity are reported. Currently, reporting occurs only per authors' discretion without a mandatory journalistic standard. In light of the current social climate and with many medical journals setting standards regarding diversity and inclusion, we hypothesize that reporting for racial and ethnic minorities has changed in American trauma and critical care journals. METHODS: The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Shock, and Critical Care Medicine were reviewed for patient outcomes research published between January 2018 and July 2024. Basic science, translational, and international studies were excluded. Manuscripts were reviewed for study type, reported race or ethnicity, and reports of specific race (e.g., White, Black, Hispanic, Asian). Data were analyzed over time using Chi-square and Cochrane-Armitage trend tests. RESULTS: A total of 1372 papers were reviewed and 527 manuscripts were included. Of these studies, 263 (51%) reported race or ethnicity in their analyses. Of the studies that reported race, 99% reported White, 83% reported Black, 39% reported Asian, and 49% reported Hispanic ethnicity. There was a significant increase in reporting of Asian race pre-2020 versus post-2020 (P = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased national attention on racial disparities in medicine, our study found that reporting of race and ethnicity in trauma and critical care research remains inconsistent. Although there has been some improvement, including increased reporting of Asian populations, most studies still predominantly report White race. Continued efforts are needed to promote inclusivity and comprehensive demographic reporting to improve the generalizability of trauma research.