Regional and supply-chain research

Pharma Packaging Pharmaceutical Equipment Keyword Candidate Study

Pharma Packaging Pharmaceutical Equipment Keyword Candidate Study. A dated 33-record cohort study compares composition, parent sets and evidence coverage. Comparative structure study; archive date 2026-10-16.

Revision and archive snapshot: 2026-10-16

Swipe tables sideways to see all columns.

Research findings

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Jiangsu, contains 7 records (21.2% of this 33-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 26 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded industry label Biomedicine accounts for 69.7% here (23/33), compared with 8.9% in the parent set (1,721/19,297), an absolute gap of 60.8 percentage points.

16/33 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (48.5% of the cohort). The other 17 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

11 keyword candidates match only a company name, with no matching term in recorded products or sub-industry fields. Product evidence is needed before treating these as operating businesses in this segment.

Company cohortDirectly linked pagesShare of public archiveArchive date
33330.2%2026-10-16

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

Comparable sets and compositional differences

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

CategoryCohort count/baseReference: All public archive recordsGap (pp)Representation ratioRest count/base
industry · Biomedicine23/33 · 69.7%1,721/19,297 · 8.9%+60.87.811,698/19,264
chain role · Biomedicine and medical devices / Complete systems and use-case applications16/33 · 48.5%1,373/19,297 · 7.1%+41.46.811,357/19,264
sub-industry · Chemical drugs and formulations11/33 · 33.3%143/19,297 · 0.7%+32.644.98132/19,264
sub-industry · Biomedicine7/33 · 21.2%699/19,297 · 3.6%+17.65.86692/19,264
chain role · Biomedicine and medical devices / Process equipment and inspection instruments5/33 · 15.2%12/19,297 · 0.1%+15.1243.657/19,264
industry · Advanced equipment5/33 · 15.2%4,918/19,297 · 25.5%-10.30.594,913/19,264
reporting jurisdiction · Jiangsu7/33 · 21.2%3,025/19,297 · 15.7%+5.51.353,018/19,264
chain role · Advanced equipment and industrial automation / Process equipment and inspection instruments7/33 · 21.2%4,085/19,297 · 21.2%+0.01.004,078/19,264

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

Excluding this cohort, the recorded industry label Biomedicine covers 1,698/19,264 remaining records (8.8%), an absolute gap of 60.9 percentage points from this cohort.

Concentration and cross-sectional structure

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 19 labels; the top 3 contain 12/33 records (36.4%).Other known labels contain 21 records.

For 33 records with known labels, the effective category count is 11.7, versus 19 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 9 others are included in the calculations above.

Recorded labelRecordsShare of cohort
Jiangsu721.2%
Liaoning39.1%
Anhui26.1%
Shandong26.1%
Henan26.1%
Zhejiang26.1%
Hubei26.1%
Chongqing26.1%
Shanghai13.0%
Yunnan13.0%

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Jiangsu × Biomedicine, contains 5 records, or 71.4% of the 7 records carrying the Jiangsu label.

reporting jurisdictionindustryIntersection recordsCohort share
JiangsuBiomedicine515.2%
AnhuiBiomedicine26.1%
HubeiBiomedicine26.1%
ChongqingBiomedicine26.1%
ShanghaiBiomedicine13.0%
YunnanBiomedicine13.0%
JilinBiomedicine13.0%
SichuanLight industry and textiles13.0%

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

This page displays 8 of the full cross-tab’s 26 non-empty cells; the other 18 remain in the analysis.

Evidence coverage and strength of conclusions

Record fieldNon-empty/cohortCompletion
Company name33/33100.0%
reporting jurisdiction33/33100.0%
industry33/33100.0%
Recorded products33/33100.0%
sub-industry33/33100.0%
Chain labels33/33100.0%

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

Scope of source supportCount
Profiles with source-supported excerpts16
Distinct corresponding companies16
Reviewed Chinese/English paragraph pairs16

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

Transparent rule reminderRecordsCohort share
Only generic operations vocabulary remains13.0%

A rule hit prioritises review; it does not establish that the entire field is wrong. One record can trigger several rules.

Matched fieldCandidatesCohort share
Company name1236.4%
Recorded products2060.6%
Sub-industry26.1%

An ID may match several fields, so counts may exceed the cohort total. Matches establish search relevance only.

Among the translated non-broad query terms, “capsules” has the most matches: 14/33. Name, product and sub-industry fields match 1, 14 and 0 records respectively; the largest field is product field. Fields can overlap, and a term remains a search link rather than verified business activity.

Selected query termCandidates/shareName matchesProduct fieldSub-industry
capsules14 · 42.4%1140

Selected broad terms and specific segment terms, not the full query. Terms and fields can overlap and must not be summed. Counts show lexical sensitivity; no records are removed without primary evidence.

11 candidates match only a name, or lose all product-field matches after the full company name is removed while sub-industry also has no hit. This transparent string test locates copied company descriptions; it does not establish that a company does not operate the business.

Intersection with 2026 local lists

5 of this cohort’s 33 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (15.2%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

Observation setList recordsNew-applicant recordsReview recordsMapped company IDs
National list records linked to this cohort’s IDs5145

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

Stored 2026 local-recommendation records, sources and stage definitions

Recorded roles and delivery checks

Drug-production leads need validation and change records

The Chemical drugs and formulations label covers 11 records (33.3% of this cohort). This archive clue raises a verification question about Defined pharmaceutical-production or testing services with quality documents; it does not establish that these companies already deliver it.

Delivery framework, stages and original sources

Related studies and shared records

Shared records with Pharmaceutical Tablet Capsule Equipment Keyword Candidate Study: 13; records in this cohort but outside that set: 20. The intersection/union ratio is 38.2%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Pharmaceutical Equipment Cleanroom Keyword Candidate Study: 15; records in this cohort but outside that set: 18. The intersection/union ratio is 37.5%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Company samples and record links

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

Directly related profiles and reports

Methodology

Read ID deduplication, comparison, batch and evidence definitions