====== Spine Journal ======

(ISSN: 0362-2436)

[[Spine]] is one of the most established journals in spinal research and surgery. Below is a critical analysis of its strengths and limitations.

===== 📈 Strengths =====

  * **Reputation & Reach:**  
    Established in 1976 and published biweekly by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, *Spine* is a leading journal in spinal disorders with broad international recognition and strong affiliations with global spine societies.

  * **Citation Impact:**  
    Maintains a solid presence with a historical impact factor around 3.0 (slightly declined to ~2.6 in 2023). Continues to be ranked in the top ~15% of orthopaedic journals.

  * **Peer‑Review & Editorial Standards:**  
    The peer-review process is rigorous, with multidisciplinary evaluation and consistent editorial quality.

  * **Timeliness:**  
    Median time from submission to publication is ~175 days, competitive with biomedical publication standards.

===== ⚠️ Weaknesses / Critiques =====

  * **Declining Impact Factor:**  
    Recent drop in impact factor from 3.0 to ~2.6 suggests either increasing competition or reduced citation rates.

  * **Overreliance on Metrics:**  
    Editorial direction may prioritize high-citation content (e.g., reviews, trending topics), potentially at the expense of methodological or negative-result studies.

  * **Opaque Peer-Review Details:**  
    Lack of transparency regarding reviewer conflicts of interest or public review histories, which are becoming best practices in academic publishing.

  * **Access and Fees:**  
    Hybrid access model. Optional open-access with APCs, which may be restrictive for authors without institutional support.

===== 🎯 Comparative Perspective =====

  * Compared to *[[The Spine Journal]]* (Elsevier, ISSN: 1529-9430, IF ~4.17), *Spine* remains historically more established but now ranks slightly lower in terms of impact factor and perceived academic novelty.
  * Newer journals are increasingly open-access and more transparent in peer-review practices, offering alternative platforms for authors.

===== 🧩 Overall Assessment =====

  * **For Readers:**  
    A reliable source for clinically relevant spine research and surgical updates.
  
  * **For Authors:**  
    Publication carries prestige but be aware of costs and competition from newer, high-IF journals.

  * **For the Field:**  
    *Spine* must evolve in transparency, peer-review innovation, and open-access engagement to retain leadership.

===== ✅ Final Verdict =====

*Spine* is a cornerstone in spinal literature with enduring value, but it faces modern publishing challenges. It remains highly recommended for established clinicians and researchers, while younger investigators may also explore newer open-access alternatives.