Advanced medical devices / Biomedicine and medical devices / Complete systems and use-case applications Sub-industry and Supply-chain Study

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Jiangsu, contains 65 records (20.2% of this 321-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 256 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded reporting jurisdiction label Jiangsu accounts for 20.2% here (65/321), compared with 14.3% in the parent set (196/1,373), an absolute gap of 6.0 percentage points.

118/321 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (36.8% of the cohort). The other 203 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 321 (23.4%); 1,052 records remain after excluding it.

The parent set, Advanced medical devices, contains 878 records. This cohort contributes 321 (36.6%); 557 records remain after excluding it.

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

Excluding this cohort, the recorded reporting jurisdiction label Jiangsu covers 131/1,052 remaining records (12.5%), an absolute gap of 7.8 percentage points from this cohort.

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 26 labels; the top 3 contain 148/321 records (46.1%).Other known labels contain 173 records.

For 321 records with known labels, the effective category count is 9.5, versus 26 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 16 others are included in the calculations above.

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Jiangsu × Biomedicine, contains 62 records, or 95.4% of the 65 records carrying the Jiangsu 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.

This page displays 8 of the full cross-tab’s 35 non-empty cells; the other 27 remain in the analysis.

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.

79 of this cohort’s 321 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (24.6%). 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 High End Medical Device Keyword Candidate Study: 321; records in this cohort but outside that set: 0. The intersection/union ratio is 33.4%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Medical Device Keyword Candidate Study: 321; records in this cohort but outside that set: 0. The intersection/union ratio is 24.7%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

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