I came across the following in some recent paper/factsheet - I think it was advice on getting a paper published: Full free text: http://www.epidemiology.ch/history/PDF bg/Sackett DL 1979 bias in analytic research.pdf This sentence summarises it: There are probably two ways to read the paper: (i) read the whole paper through (ii) just read: APPENDIX. A CATALOG OF BIASES The latter is quite short. It gives names for lots of different types of bias one might think of but not have names for (one could reference this paper when naming them). I think at least a few are commonly named something else now but one could probably still use the names here. Most of them I understood but a few I would have preferred a bit more detail to be sure exactly what was being said. Reading the full paper probably helped me understand better the nine that are expanded on (i.e. if you didn't read the full paper, it might harder to simply read some of the Appendix). The main paper takes a bit more thought. It doesn't require mathematical knowledge as such but require one to think through the numerical examples. Anyway, one doesn't have to read it to read the Appendix.