Biomedicine and medical devices / Digital software and industrial services Supply-chain Study

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Shanghai, contains 26 records (78.8% of this 33-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 7 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded reporting jurisdiction label Shanghai accounts for 78.8% here (26/33), compared with 9.0% in the parent set (130/1,449), an absolute gap of 69.8 percentage points.

7/33 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (21.2% of the cohort). The other 26 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

An ID-deduplicated archive snapshot, not the whole market, current recognition or operating results.

The parent set, Biomedicine and medical devices, contains 1,449 records. This cohort contributes 33 (2.3%); 1,416 records remain after excluding it.

The parent set, All public archive records, contains 19,297 records. This cohort contributes 33 (0.2%); 19,264 records remain after excluding it.

Ratio of label participation, not market share; multi-label counts overlap.

Excluding this cohort, the recorded reporting jurisdiction label Shanghai covers 104/1,416 remaining records (7.3%), an absolute gap of 71.4 percentage points from this cohort.

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 6 labels; the top 3 contain 30/33 records (90.9%).Other known labels contain 3 records.

For 33 records with known labels, the effective category count is 1.6, versus 6 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Shanghai × Biomedicine, contains 25 records, or 96.2% of the 26 records carrying the Shanghai label.

A cell contains company IDs carrying both labels. It does not establish procurement, supply or investment relationships between firms. Multi-label cells may overlap.

All 7 non-empty cross-tab cells are displayed.

Non-empty fields are not necessarily accurate or supported by originals.

Counts concern existing reviewed bilingual excerpts, not re-certification of originals or entire reports.

6 of this cohort’s 33 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (18.2%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

List rows and company IDs are separate counts, not new firms or final recognition.

Shared records with Shanghai / Biomedicine Company Structure Study: 25; records in this cohort but outside that set: 8. The intersection/union ratio is 16.1%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Pharmaceutical CDMO Bioprocess Equipment Keyword Candidate Study: 2; records in this cohort but outside that set: 31. The intersection/union ratio is 5.0%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Stable-ID samples, not rankings; metrics use the full cohort.