Dr Jennifer Gill is an Associate Director at the Medical Technology Research Group (MTRG) within LSE Health and has worked with LSE Consulting for almost a decade.
Her work spans a wide range of healthcare policy and system challenges across Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia, including medicines access, real world evidence, cancer care and health system transformation.
In this Expert Voices interview, Dr Gill reflects on key lessons from her applied research and consulting work, the value of academic consulting for industry and policymakers, and the role of collaboration in delivering evidence that supports better healthcare decision-making.
Dr Gill, your work spans a wide range of healthcare challenges, from personalised oncology to health system financing and non-communicable disease care. What would you say are some of the most persistent barriers to improving healthcare globally?
A lot of the challenges we see across health systems are less about science and more about how systems are organised. In our recent work on health system transformation, it became clear that many countries are still working with models designed for short term, acute care, even though most patients now have complex, long term needs. This creates a real mismatch.
Among some of the challenges is fragmentation. When services do not coordinate with each other, patients end up navigating disjointed pathways. Financing can also work against good care, especially when payment models reward activity rather than outcomes. Then there are inequities adding further dilemma, whether in access to advanced therapies or even basic non communicable disease care. Data is another problem. Weak data systems struggle with interoperability or with making good use of real-world evidence, which limits informed decision making. And of course, workforce shortages, particularly in primary and specialist care, is another notorious barrier. And finally, even when the right policies exist, political and implementation barriers can slow progress.
So we can see that there are multiple factors, and all of these together make it difficult for health systems to turn innovation into meaningful, equitable improvements for patients.
Many of your projects with LSE Consulting focus on how evidence is used in healthcare decision-making, like your work on real world evidence, pricing policy and system transformation. How important is such evidence-backed research for policymakers and health system leaders to make informed decisions?
Evidence-backed research is fundamental for informed healthcare decision-making. It helps bridge the gap between what works in clinical trials and what actually works for people in real life. For policymakers, it provides a clearer picture of value, which is crucial when resources are limited. It also supports decisions on pricing, reimbursement and wider system reform by showing which models of care genuinely improve outcomes.
And most importantly, evidence brings transparency. When decisions are grounded in robust analysis, they tend to be more credible and more acceptable to stakeholders.
But the real challenge is not producing evidence but making sure it is consistently used. Embedding it into routine policymaking, in a way that is sensitive to context and practical constraints, is where the real impact happens.
Having contributed to studies covering diverse regions, including in Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia, what differences have you observed in the challenges faced by health systems, and what lessons can be shared across countries despite these differences?
I have observed that across regions, the specific challenges health systems face vary in degree, but the underlying themes can be consistent.
In Europe, the big questions tend to revolve around fiscal sustainability, ageing populations and how to integrate innovation in a way that remains affordable. Systems are strong, but reform can be slow because structures are complex. In Latin America, fragmentation and inequality are often more pronounced. High levels of informality in labour markets can make it harder to generate stable health financing and to pool risk effectively. In Southeast Asia, many countries are still expanding coverage and strengthening primary care while also dealing with a rapid rise in non-communicable diseases. Infrastructure, workforce capacity and data systems can vary widely.
Despite the differences, there are lessons that can be shared across regions.
Strong primary care is foundational everywhere. Aligning financing with outcomes rather than volume improves both equity and efficiency. And countries that invest in governance, delivery systems and stakeholder alignment tend to make more sustained progress. The solutions always need to be adapted, but the core building blocks of resilient systems are remarkably transferable.
Several of your reports centre on patient experience and access, such as work on cancer care, cardiovascular disease and autism. Why is it important to foreground patient perspectives in health policy research, and how can this be done effectively in large-scale studies?
Putting patients at the centre of health policy research is vital because it shifts the focus from services to people. Patients often highlight barriers that do not show up in clinical or administrative data, this can include but is not limited to delays in diagnosis, financial strain, stigma and even the difficulty of navigating care.
Understanding these experiences helps ensure that policies reflect what matters most to patients, including quality of life, continuity and dignity, not just clinical outcomes. It also makes interventions more acceptable and more effective.
In large scale studies, this can be done by incorporating patient reported outcomes and experience measures, using a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods, and involving patient groups throughout the research process. We find that when patients help shape the work from the start, the findings tend to be far more relevant and impactful.
How has being part of LSE Health and the Medical Technology Research Group shaped the way you approach applied healthcare research and consulting projects?
I think the work we do is grounded both in academic rigour and real-world relevance. The working environment encourages a bridge between theory and practice, ensuring that research does not sit in isolation but directly informs decision-making. It has also emphasised the importance of engaging stakeholders early and tailoring outputs to policymakers, providers, and industry, so that findings are actionable, not just academically robust. Ultimately, it has shaped an approach that is evidence-driven, context-sensitive, and focused on delivering real-world impact.
What do you see as the unique value that academic consulting brings to healthcare research and policy, particularly for industry and public sector clients?
Academic consulting allows a distinctive combination of rigour, independence, and practical relevance to healthcare research and policy. I would summarise my key points on the importance of about academic consulting like this:
Firstly, it ensures methodological credibility and analytical depth. Drawing on established academic frameworks and peer-reviewed approaches helps produce robust, transparent evidence that stakeholders can trust.
Secondly, academic groups can offer independence and objectivity, which is particularly valuable for both industry and public sector clients navigating complex or politically sensitive decisions. This can strengthen the acceptance of findings among relevant stakeholders.
Thirdly, academic consulting acts as a bridge between evidence and practice. The work translates complex data into clear, policy-relevant insights, while remaining grounded in the realities of any constraints, implementation challenges, and stakeholder perspectives.
Ultimately, the value lies in delivering evidence that is not only rigorous, but also credible, actionable, and relevant to real-world decision-making.
Dr Gill’s reflections point to a consistent theme across her work: that improving healthcare systems is not only about innovation, but about how evidence, incentives and patient needs are brought together in practice. Her experience across regions highlights both the complexity of these challenges and the shared foundations of effective reform. By combining academic rigour with practical insight, this kind of work helps ensure that research does not remain theoretical, but actively supports more equitable, sustainable and patient-centred healthcare systems worldwide.
To discuss ideas on collaboration or projects with Dr Gill and her team at MTRG, contact LSE Consulting at consulting@lse.ac.uk.
Awarded The Times’ Top University in the UK in 2024 and in 2025, as well as London’s Top University by the Complete University Guide for 14 consecutive years, the London School of Economics and Political Science is a world-leading institute with expertise in social science research. Connect with the best researchers and academics from LSE via LSE Consulting to see research turn into impact.