A 45-year-old woman who gets less than 30 minutes of daily physical activity in addition to her normal routine should consume six ounce of grains; two and a half cups of vegetables; one and a half cups of fruit; three cups of milk; five ounces of meat and/or beans; five teaspoons of oil; and just 195 calories of additional fat and sugar. With a higher level of daily activity (30 to 60 minutes), this woman would be able to consume a little more in certain food groups: her fruit intake could rise to two cups; meat and beans to five and a half ounces; oils to six teaspoons; and extra fat and sugar to 265 calories.
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]

Our review highlighted how a focus on delivery platforms could indicate who is missed by different nutrition interventions, by evaluating where there is overlap or divergence in where interventions are delivered (as represented in the Venn diagram in Figure 1). Our findings showed that a large proportion of nutrition-specific interventions were delivered at clinic-based settings or community-based health posts. Health centers are important delivery platforms, particularly for pregnant and lactating women (113, 210). However, only half of women worldwide even attend the appropriate number of antenatal care visits (with nearly 86% of women attending 1 visit) and only 59% receive appropriate postnatal care (211). Other delivery platforms, such as schools and universities, were more effective at reaching some adolescents and women of reproductive age. However, interventions delivered at “facilities” (schools, health clinics, health posts) require participation with those facilities, and participation is often limited because of time, costs, distance, and other responsibilities, including work and childcare (116). Facilities-based care is also more likely to miss certain groups, including older women.
 Social protection  Health centers (“condition” and delivery platform)    ↑ knowledge about health and nutrition, ↑ HH food consumption, ↑ food expenditures, ↑/NC food share, ↑ dietary diversity, ↑ HH intake of fruits, vegetables, and ASF, ↑/NC intake of fats and sweets, ↑ participation in social networks, ↑ self-confidence, ↑ control HH resources  ↑ knowledge about health and nutrition, ↑ HH food security, ↑ food expenditures, ↑/NC food share, ↑ HH food consumption, ↑ dietary diversity, ↑ HH intake of fruits, vegetables, and ASF, ↑/NC intake of fats and sweets, ↑ self-confidence, ↑ participation in social networks, ↑ control HH resources, ↑ ANC coverage   
Adult women, and particularly women with children, were the primary targets for empowerment interventions. Empowerment interventions were predominantly delivered through community-based programs, including home visits, community groups, and community centers (5, 161, 163). There was some evidence that empowerment interventions that included delivery platforms such as radio and television, as a complement to the community- and home-based delivery platforms (5), could have some impact on reaching a wider audience. Adolescent girls were largely not the target of empowerment interventions, except for those relating to reproductive health (158), and could potentially benefit from them.
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.