Johnson, Paula A.; Therese Fitzgerald, Therese; Salganicoff, Alina; Wood, Susan F.; Goldstein, Jill M. (3 March 2014). Sex-Specific Medical Research Why Women's Health Can't Wait: A Report of the Mary Horrigan Connors Center for Women's Health & Gender Biology at Brigham and Women's Hospital (PDF). Boston MA: Mary Horrigan Connors Center for Women's Health & Gender Biology.
Nutrition education, including communication and counseling to raise awareness and promote nutrition-related knowledge and behaviors aligned with public health goals, was found to increase women's knowledge and improve women's dietary diversity and protein intake (15–21). It also reduced energy intake of overweight women over a 9-mo period (22). However, evidence for the effectiveness of nutrition education interventions showed mixed impact on biological and anthropometric markers of women's nutritional status (14–16, 18, 23–29). This could be due to lack of statistical power given the small sample sizes of the reviewed studies. For adolescent girls, nutrition education was found to reduce odds of overweight, and improve knowledge, dietary intake, physical activity, and sedentary behavior (27, 29, 30). This was particularly true for nutrition education that lasted longer than 12 mo (29). Nutrition education was also more strongly associated with changes in health outcomes in studies evaluating childhood obesity treatment, rather than childhood obesity prevention (29).
Our findings identified gaps and limitations in the evaluation, scope, targeting, and delivery platforms of nutrition interventions in low- and middle-income countries. First, the monitoring and evaluation of nutrition programs that reported on women's nutrition outcomes was generally inadequate. Many of the studies we identified included small-scale efficacy trials. Although there were many large-scale programs that targeted women and adolescent girls with nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive approaches, they lacked rigorous evaluation. Whether the evidence about women's outcomes was limited because they are not systematically measured or because they are not well reported is not clear. Negative results are often not published, and many evaluations of nutrition interventions that are conducted by the same groups responsible for implementing them are typically presented positively. This may have also skewed our findings. More intentional research-quality program evaluation, including of large-scale programs, would provide a stronger evidence base. Of the studies identified in this review, many reported on short-term findings such as changes in knowledge, dietary behaviors, and program coverage. They were limited in their ability to report clinical and anthropometric outcomes for women, the duration of those outcomes, and the feasibility of scaling up programs. There is also a need for systematic, long-term evaluations of interventions whose effects on nutrition outcomes are more distal (e.g., nutrition education compared with micronutrient supplementation). The effects of multisectoral interventions are even more complex to measure. However, frameworks exist to evaluate complex interventions (102) and could be utilized to evaluate the impact of interventions across the life course.