In the past, women have often tried to make up deficits in their diet though the use of vitamins and supplements. However, while supplements can be a useful safeguard against occasional nutrient shortfalls, they can’t compensate for an unbalanced or unhealthy diet. To ensure you get all the nutrients you need from the food you eat, try to aim for a diet rich in fruit, vegetables, quality protein, healthy fats, and low in processed, fried, and sugary foods.
A related issue is the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical studies. Since other illnesses can exist concurrently with pregnancy, information is needed on the response to and efficacy of interventions during pregnancy, but ethical issues relative to the fetus, make this more complex. This gender bias is partly offset by the iniation of large scale epidemiology studies of women, such as the Nurses' Health Study (1976),[162] Women's Health Initiative[163] and Black Women's Health Study.[164][6]
The tiny gender differences in minerals other than calcium and iron depend on body size. But while the dietary requirements for selenium fit this rule, men may benefit from supplements of about 200 micrograms a day, a level about four times above the RDA. That's because both a clinical trial and an observational study suggest that selenium may reduce the risk of prostate cancer. It's far from proven, but it's something for men to consider.
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death (30%) amongst women in the United States, and the leading cause of chronic disease amongst them, affecting nearly 40% (Gronowski and Schindler, Tables I and IV).[6][7][119] The onset occurs at a later age in women than in men. For instance the incidence of stroke in women under the age of 80 is less than that in men, but higher in those aged over 80. Overall the lifetime risk of stroke in women exceeds that in men.[27][28] The risk of cardiovascular disease amongst those with diabetes and amongst smokers is also higher in women than in men.[6] Many aspects of cardiovascular disease vary between women and men, including risk factors, prevalence, physiology, symptoms, response to intervention and outcome.[119]
Social protection programs typically target the most marginalized members of communities and typically families with children (5, 196). Cash transfers are often targeted to women in these households because they more often invest the transfers in household and food expenditures than men do (192, 202, 204, 205). Cash transfer programs were also targeted to older adults through government-coordinated programs (196, 198, 206). The delivery of transfers involved community centers (town halls, post offices) and banks, as well as locations associated with other services, e.g., schools or health centers (192, 206, 207). These latter platforms were relevant not only for the distribution of social protection programs (i.e., the receipt of transfers), but also for enrollment in and “conditions” of those programs. Conditional transfers required that recipients had access to certain delivery platforms (e.g., schools and health centers) in order to meet the “conditions” of their transfer, and this was a limitation in very rural areas. Although social protection programs are intended for the most vulnerable populations, their delivery platforms can serve as barriers to individuals’ receipt of services, particularly if they require engagement with health care, school, or work-related systems.
Women's health is positioned within a wider body of knowledge cited by, amongst others, the World Health Organization, which places importance on gender as a social determinant of health.[22] While women's health is affected by their biology, it is also affected by their social conditions, such as poverty, employment, and family responsibilities, and these aspects should not be overshadowed.[23][24]
  Home visits  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ hand-washing, ↑ water quality, ↓/NC diarrheal morbidity, ↓ intestinal parasite prevalence  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ hand-washing, ↑ water quality, ↓/NC diarrheal morbidity, ↓ intestinal parasite prevalence  ↓ maternal mortality, ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑/NC hand-washing, ↑ water quality, NC waste disposal, ↓/NC diarrheal morbidity, ↓ intestinal parasite prevalence  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ hand-washing, ↑ water quality, ↓/NC diarrheal morbidity, ↓ intestinal parasite prevalence 

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.


Systematically report and evaluate women's nutrition outcomes in research and program evaluation documents in low- and middle-income countries, including outcomes for adolescents, older women, and mothers (as opposed to reporting on women's nutrition as child nutrition outcomes alone). When possible, report and evaluate differences by setting (e.g., rural compared with urban) and socioeconomic status.

×