Although we see modest gains in QC metrics by applying our practices, there are limitations to consider. For example, even though the concordance rate between super-population assignment and self-reported census race was high (+92.4%), we cannot rule out the possibility that a portion of the 4.6% of samples that changed super-population category were due to sample mix-ups, which could impact results. However, it should be noted that our method can correct some response biases due to misrepresentation by respondents whether intentionally or unintentionally (e.g.; ethnic identity, truthfulness, technical problems). For example, 37 S4S respondents self-identified as census category white were empirically matched to SAS, representing 6.3% of the S4S SAS super population. Although a seemingly large proportion of cross-super population mismatch, this rate is consistent with previous reports of census race category endorsements of South Asians in the US (e.g.; Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi).32
