Natalie Gil

Pronouns: She/Her


Postgraduate Researcher
BSc (Hons), MSc

Academic and research departments

School of Health Sciences.

About

Natalie Gil is a Postgraduate Researcher and Trainee Health Psychologist in the School of Health Sciences at the University of Surrey. Her PhD applies psychological theory and methods to understand and address inequities in cancer care for people with a learning disability. Drawing on behavioural and implementation science, her research focuses on making cancer pathways more accessible, acceptable, and effective for underserved groups.

Alongside her doctoral studies, Natalie works as a Research Assistant on NIHR- and CRUK-funded projects aimed at improving early diagnosis, access, and outcomes in cancer care. She has extensive experience collaborating with NHS partners, patient and public contributors, and interdisciplinary research teams.

My qualifications

BSc (Hons) Applied Psychology
Liverpool John Moores University
MSc Health Psychology
University College London

Affiliations and memberships

British Psychological Society
GMBPsS
Graduate Member of British Psychological Society

Research

Research interests

Research projects

Publications

N. Gil, H. Su, K. Kaur, M. Barnett, A. Murray, S. Duffy, et al. (2022) Patient experience and satisfaction with symptomatic faecal immunochemical testing: an explanatory sequential mixed-methods evaluation

Background Recent evidence suggests that faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) can rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in symptomatic adults. To date, there has been little research exploring experiences of FIT for this population.Aim To explore patient experience and satisfaction with FIT in an ‘early adopter’ site in England.Design Explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach combining mailed quantitative surveys with semi-structured telephone interviews.Method Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyse quantitative data. Thematic analysis was used to assess qualitative transcripts.Results The survey had 260 responders, and it found that satisfaction with FIT was high (88.7%). Compared with test satisfaction, the proportion of responders satisfied with their GP consultation and how they received their results was lower (74.4% and 76.2%, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that increased area-level deprivation and not receiving an explanation of the purpose of the test were associated with lower satisfaction with the GP consultation (both P-values <0.05), while increased area-level deprivation and not receiving results from the GP were associated with lower satisfaction with receiving results (both P-values <0.05). Interviews with responders (n = 20) helped explain the quantitative results. They revealed that ‘not knowing the purpose of the test’ caused ‘anxiety’ and ‘confusion’, which led to dissatisfaction. ‘Not receiving results from GP’ was considered ‘unacceptable’, as this left patients with a ‘niggling doubt’ and lack of diagnosis or assurance that they did not have cancer.Conclusion Patient satisfaction with symptomatic FIT is high. Efforts to improve satisfaction should focus on ensuring that patients understand the purpose of the test and always receive their test results.

R. Kerrison, N. Gil, E. Travis, R. Jones, K. Whitaker, C. Rees, et al. (2023) Barriers to colonoscopy in UK colorectal cancer screening programmes: Qualitative interviews with ethnic minority groups.

Objective: People from ethnic minority backgrounds are less likely to attend colonoscopy, following faecal immunochemical test screening, and are more likely to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer at an advanced stage as a result. The aim of this research was to explore the barriers and facilitators to attending colonoscopy, perceived by ethnic minority groups living in the United Kingdom. Methods: Semi-structured online and telephone interviews were conducted with thirty men and women of Black-African(n=5), Black-Caribbean(n=5), South Asian(n=10) and White British(n=10) descent. Participants were eligible for screening, but had not necessarily been invited for colonoscopy. All interviews were conducted in the participant's first language and were assessed using Framework-analysis, in line with a conceptual framework developed from previous interviews with healthcare professionals. Results: Five thematic groups of barriers and facilitators were developed: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs', 'Individual beliefs, knowledge and personal experiences with colonoscopy and cancer', 'Reliance on family and friends' and 'Health concerns'. Differences were observed, between ethnic groups, for: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs' and 'Reliance on family and friends'. Black and South Asian participants frequently described the decision to attend colonoscopy as lying with 'God' (Muslims, specifically), 'the doctor', or 'family' (Locus of control). Black and South Asian participants also reported relying on friends and family for 'language, transport and emotional support' (Reliance on family and friends). Black-African participants, specifically, described cancer as 'socially taboo' (Cultural attitudes and beliefs). Conclusions: The results highlight several targets for culturally-tailored interventions to make colonoscopy more equitable.

Gil, N., Whitker, K. L., Kerrison, R. S., Drysdale, H., Black, G., Mounce, L., Northway, R., & Cox, A. (2025) Innovations to support symptomatic cancer diagnostic pathways for people with a learning disability: A scoping review protocol.
N. Gil, Cox, A., Whitaker, K., Kerrison, R. S., (2022) Inequity in HPV vaccination, primary HPV screening, and sexual health education for people with learning disabilities, autism, and severe mental illness: A discussion.

Inequity in HPV vaccination, primary HPV screening, and sexual health education for people with learning disabilities, autism, and severe mental illness: A discussion.

Gil, N., Fisher, A., Beeken, R. J., Pini, S., Miller, N., Buck, C., Lally, P., & Conway, R. (2022) The role of partner support for health behaviours in people living with and beyond cancer: A qualitative study. Psycho-Oncology