Hubei / Biomedicine and medical devices / Complete systems and use-case applications Company Structure Study

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded industry, Biomedicine, contains 68 records (93.2% of this 73-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 5 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded sub-industry label Advanced medical devices accounts for 6.8% here (5/73), compared with 23.4% in the parent set (321/1,373), an absolute gap of 16.5 percentage points.

29/73 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (39.7% of the cohort). The other 44 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 / Complete systems and use-case applications, contains 1,373 records. This cohort contributes 73 (5.3%); 1,300 records remain after excluding it.

The parent set, Hubei, contains 866 records. This cohort contributes 73 (8.4%); 793 records remain after excluding it.

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

Excluding this cohort, the recorded sub-industry label Advanced medical devices covers 316/1,300 remaining records (24.3%), an absolute gap of 17.5 percentage points from this cohort.

The full industry distribution has 5 labels; the top 3 contain 71/73 records (97.3%).Other known labels contain 2 records.

For 73 records with known labels, the effective category count is 1.2, versus 5 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

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.

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

15 of this cohort’s 73 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (20.5%). 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.

The 2025 macro context for Hubei uses a different denominator from this cohort.

Shared records with Hubei Company Structure Study: 73; records in this cohort but outside that set: 0. The intersection/union ratio is 8.4%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Biomedicine / Biomedicine and medical devices / Complete systems and use-case applications Sub-industry and Supply-chain Study: 43; records in this cohort but outside that set: 30. The intersection/union ratio is 6.4%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

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