After submitting my manuscript to Frontiers in Oncology, I recently received feedback. The comments were overall minor, but I am concerned about the quality assessment provided at the end:

    Rigor: 2
    Quality of the writing: 2
    Overall quality of the content: 2
    Interest to a general audience: 2

I am curious about the scoring scale used by Frontiers in Oncology for peer review. Does anyone know how this scale is defined or what these scores indicate about my manuscript?

  • Perhaps rating 1 is "outstanding", so 2 is "not bad at all" ?? I wonder how far down the scale goes.
    – GEdgar
    Mar 1 at 21:20

1 Answer 1


I have a paper published in Frontiers in Oncology. Each reviewer provided a Quality Assessment like this:

enter image description here

They use a 5-level scale which is ordered from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) quality, inferred based on my paper positive comments and outcome. I checked the available guidelines for Frontiers' reviewers, but they do not mention this scale. I also couldn't find anything about these scales on their website.

  • 2
    I was also just looking, and found a similar (physics) paper that I also would have suggested 5 is the good end of the scale. Mar 3 at 19:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .