The pathways and implementation strategies for scientific, technical, and medical (STM) journals to effectively facilitate the transformation of scientific research achievements are investigated, with a focus on resolving the disconnect between demand and service in the innovation chain and bridging the gap between "paper-based achievements" (research papers) and "production lines" (industrial application). Through literature review, data analysis, and in-depth case studies, it elucidates the functional role of STM journals in achievement transformation and proposes actionable tactics to enhance their service capabilities. This paper identifies three core functions of STM journals in driving transformation. First, as a foundational platform for knowledge dissemination and scientific validation, they authenticate the scientific rigor of research outputs through rigorous peer review, laying a credible groundwork for industrial adoption. Second, as a value-identification tool, their interdisciplinary editorial and review teams, comprising clinical specialists, industry consultants, and researchers, excavate the application potential of achievements, emphasizing economic and societal impact. Third, as a connectivity hub for industry-academia-research collaboration, they organize academic forums, showcase transformation cases, and enable the sequential transformation of "basic research—application development—industrial implementation". Nevertheless, three critical bottlenecks are pinpointed. First, fragmented academic evaluation systems prioritize citation metrics and journal impact factors over transformation potential, resulting in a national scientific research patent conversion rate of merely 6% and a university invention patent industrialization rate of 3.9%. Second, journals lack robust information screening and matchmaking mechanisms: most fail to integrate "clinical—research—industry" needs or specify application scenarios, causing an average 5-year lag between academic publications and industrialization. Third, traditional journals operate solely as "paper publishers" rather than "knowledge hubs, " failing to foster a collaborative ecosystem balancing the "academic prestige focus" of research institutions and the "commercial viability focus" of enterprises. To address these challenges, five targeted solutions are proposed: refine content positioning by incorporating "technology transformation columns" (e.g., Chinese Medical Journal tracking COVID-19 miRNA diagnostic markers) and establishing a "clinical-research-industry" topic linkage mechanism, exemplified by Cancer Pathogenesis and Therapy (CPT) curating interdisciplinary themes; strengthen service capacities via a "basic research + application value" dual-track review framework (adopted by The New England Journal of Medicine) and interdisciplinary editorial boards with clinical, industry, and regulatory experts; build collaborative platforms featuring online transformation zones (e.g., CPT planning an "anti-cancer technology transfer" section) and offline technical matchmaking symposia; advance internationalization through joint special issues with global journals and engagement in worldwide technology networks; and enhance evaluation protocols by monitoring transformation outcomes (e.g., patent acquisition, Regulatory Approval). In conclusion, STM journals must evolve from "paper disseminators" to "knowledge hubs", effectively connecting laboratories and production lines. This evolution accelerates the transformation of scientific research achievements while contributing to the cultivation of new quality productive forces, aligning with national strategies to integrate innovation and industrial progression and operationalizing the principle that "scientists should write the paper on the land of our country" and apply technological achievements to modernization.