DEWIDAR et al

BackgroundNutritional counseling, which includes two-way interactive education, has been hypothesized to improve the health and nutritional status of pregnant women, but little is known about the impact such practice of care might have on maternal and infant health and behavioral outcomes of pregnant women living in low income, low-middle income, and upper-middle-income countries (LMIC)s.ObjectivesWe conducted a systematic review to appraise the effectiveness and impact on health equity of two-way nutritional counseling practices in LMICs on maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes.Search MethodsWe conducted electronic searches for relevant studies on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and the Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized and non-randomized trials on the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutritional counseling among pregnant women from the date of database inception up to June 22, 2021. In addition, we searched references of included studies in systematic reviews, gray literature resources, and unpublished studies or reports that satisfied our eligibility criteria using a focused Google search.Selection CriteriaWe included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS), controlled before and after, and interrupted time series that assessed the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutrition counseling targeting pregnant women in LMICs.Data Collection and AnalysisData extraction and risk of bias were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias (ROB) for randomized trials (RCT) was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews, and ROB for NRS was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). RCT and NRS were meta-analyzed separately.Main ResultsOur search identified 6418 records and 52 studies met our inclusion criteria, but only 28 were used in the quantitative analysis. Twenty-eight studies were conducted in Asia, the most in Iran. Eight studies were conducted in Africa. Two-way interactive nutritional counseling during pregnancy may improve dietary caloric intake (mean difference [MD]: 81.65 calories, 95% confidence interval [CI], 15.37–147.93, three RCTs; I2 = 42%; moderate certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), may reduce hemorrhage (relative risk [RR]: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.25–1.54, two RCTs; I2 = 40%; very low certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), may improve protein (MD: 10.44 g, 95% CI, 1.83–19.05, two RCTs; I2 = 95%; high certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), fat intake