Michael T. Hirschmann, Elmar Herbst, Giuseppe Milano, Volker Musahl
<p>As we end one amazing year and start another, let me start with the simplest and most honest words: thank you. <i>Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy</i> (<i>KSSTA</i>) depends on your judgment, fairness and determination. Every carefully thought-out criticism, every well-thought-out editorial decision and every disciplined revision by our authors has made the message we send to the orthopaedic and sports-medicine community clearer. You have worked nights and weekends to make science clearer, fairer and more useful in the operating room and at the bedside. In a very real way, the work you see in the journal today is the result of that work.</p><p>There was progress and responsibility in 2025. Our Impact Factor went up from 3.3 to 5.0, which is a clear sign that what we publish is reliable, citable and useful in the clinic. There were more than 2400 submissions, which is about a quarter more than the year before.</p><p>With growth comes responsibility: our pages are limited, our standards must be equal and our choices should help manuscripts get to their best destination. We raised the bar for acceptance not to make the gate smaller, but to make the path clearer. Methodologically strong work that does not have immediate clinical translation is increasingly finding its natural home in the <i>Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics</i> (<i>JEO</i>), where new ideas can grow.</p><p>At <i>KSSTA</i>, we made our clinical focus more specific, cut down on the time it took to make a first decision, made author guidance clearer and reached out to more people so that the best science got to the doctors who needed it.</p><p>This trait—preferring clarity over noise and relevance over rhetoric—runs through the year's most important articles.</p><p>We confirmed the strength of the scientific community in ‘Collaboration is our most powerful resistance in an increasingly fragmented world: Science is the light that reveals the unity beneath our differences’ [<span>3</span>].</p><p>We also turned the spotlight on ourselves with ‘Reporting bias in orthopaedic science—Are we telling the whole story?’ [<span>1</span>] calls for openness, pre-registration and the same respect for negative results.</p><p>We asked ourselves, ‘Is orthopaedics entering the age of generative AI?’ [<span>7</span>] provided a measured guide to applications, limits and safeguards, while ‘Artificial intelligence agents in orthopaedics: Concepts, capabilities, and the road ahead’ [<span>8</span>] expanded that perspective by translating rapidly evolving concepts into practical implications for research and care.</p><p>Our clinical discussion remained candid and multifaceted in ‘Do we require a robot in total knee arthroplasty?’ Yes! No! Not sure!—‘A well-balanced point of view’ [<span>4</span>], while “Restoring the native knee or designing the “optimal prosthetic”: Alignment, phenotypes, and AI-powered personalization in total knee arthroplasty’ [<span>5</span>] delineated the trajec
{"title":"From milestone to momentum: Thank you for powering KSSTA's present and future","authors":"Michael T. Hirschmann, Elmar Herbst, Giuseppe Milano, Volker Musahl","doi":"10.1002/ksa.70273","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ksa.70273","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As we end one amazing year and start another, let me start with the simplest and most honest words: thank you. <i>Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy</i> (<i>KSSTA</i>) depends on your judgment, fairness and determination. Every carefully thought-out criticism, every well-thought-out editorial decision and every disciplined revision by our authors has made the message we send to the orthopaedic and sports-medicine community clearer. You have worked nights and weekends to make science clearer, fairer and more useful in the operating room and at the bedside. In a very real way, the work you see in the journal today is the result of that work.</p><p>There was progress and responsibility in 2025. Our Impact Factor went up from 3.3 to 5.0, which is a clear sign that what we publish is reliable, citable and useful in the clinic. There were more than 2400 submissions, which is about a quarter more than the year before.</p><p>With growth comes responsibility: our pages are limited, our standards must be equal and our choices should help manuscripts get to their best destination. We raised the bar for acceptance not to make the gate smaller, but to make the path clearer. Methodologically strong work that does not have immediate clinical translation is increasingly finding its natural home in the <i>Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics</i> (<i>JEO</i>), where new ideas can grow.</p><p>At <i>KSSTA</i>, we made our clinical focus more specific, cut down on the time it took to make a first decision, made author guidance clearer and reached out to more people so that the best science got to the doctors who needed it.</p><p>This trait—preferring clarity over noise and relevance over rhetoric—runs through the year's most important articles.</p><p>We confirmed the strength of the scientific community in ‘Collaboration is our most powerful resistance in an increasingly fragmented world: Science is the light that reveals the unity beneath our differences’ [<span>3</span>].</p><p>We also turned the spotlight on ourselves with ‘Reporting bias in orthopaedic science—Are we telling the whole story?’ [<span>1</span>] calls for openness, pre-registration and the same respect for negative results.</p><p>We asked ourselves, ‘Is orthopaedics entering the age of generative AI?’ [<span>7</span>] provided a measured guide to applications, limits and safeguards, while ‘Artificial intelligence agents in orthopaedics: Concepts, capabilities, and the road ahead’ [<span>8</span>] expanded that perspective by translating rapidly evolving concepts into practical implications for research and care.</p><p>Our clinical discussion remained candid and multifaceted in ‘Do we require a robot in total knee arthroplasty?’ Yes! No! Not sure!—‘A well-balanced point of view’ [<span>4</span>], while “Restoring the native knee or designing the “optimal prosthetic”: Alignment, phenotypes, and AI-powered personalization in total knee arthroplasty’ [<span>5</span>] delineated the trajec","PeriodicalId":17880,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy","volume":"34 2","pages":"387-394"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2026-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://esskajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ksa.70273","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145961216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}