Show pageBacklinksCite current pageExport to PDFBack to top This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong. ====== Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders ====== Title: Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders Publisher: SAGE Publications ISSN: 1756-2856 Type: Open Access, peer-reviewed Indexing: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (SCIE) Impact Factor (2024): ~5.0 (approximate, check most recent JCR for updates) 🎯 Scope and Aims The journal focuses on publishing clinical and translational research in neurology, with particular emphasis on therapeutic interventions across a broad range of neurological conditions — from multiple sclerosis and epilepsy to neuro-oncology and stroke. Strength: It aims to provide practical, patient-centered insights and often features early-phase trials and real-world evidence that may not yet meet the threshold for higher-impact neurology journals. 🧠 Strengths Open Access: Promotes wide visibility and accessibility, allowing clinicians, researchers, and even patients to engage with content without paywalls. Speed of Publication: Offers relatively fast peer review and publication timelines, which is valuable for emerging therapies and COVID-era clinical updates. Clinically Oriented Focus: TAND often publishes reviews, observational studies, and case-based insights that are useful for practicing neurologists. Inclusive of Underrepresented Topics: Willing to publish on neglected diseases, rare disorders, and therapies not well covered in journals like Brain, Neurology, or Lancet Neurology. ⚠️ Weaknesses Editorial Rigor and Selectivity The bar for methodological robustness is often lower than top-tier journals. Many papers lack pre-registration, randomization, or detailed statistical validation. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses with retrospective studies are frequently published without sufficient scrutiny, leading to overinterpretation of low-level evidence. Overreliance on Observational Data Many articles present associative findings as causal conclusions. There's an editorial tendency to favor narrative impact over methodological conservatism. Impact Factor Inflation via Reviews A disproportionate number of narrative reviews and opinion pieces boosts citations but dilutes the originality and scientific rigor of the content. Predatory Publishing Risk Perception Despite being a legitimate journal under SAGE, some clinicians confuse TAND with lower-tier or predatory journals because of its high volume of non-randomized, industry-sponsored studies. 🧮 Relevance for Neuro-Oncology and Neurosurgery Useful for hypothesis generation, safety studies, and real-world data. Not a go-to journal for definitive evidence or practice-changing trials in neurosurgical fields. May serve as a stepping stone for early-career researchers or for topics too narrow for higher-impact venues. ⚖️ Verdict TAND occupies a niche between rigorously selective journals and volume-driven open-access platforms. It offers speed and visibility, but at the cost of editorial depth and scientific conservatism. For clinicians, it can be a source of early signals, not final answers. For researchers, it is a viable target — provided the work is clinically framed, clearly written, and acknowledges its evidentiary limitations. therapeutic_advances_in_neurological_disorders.txt Last modified: 2025/06/18 19:08by administrador