Table 4.

Feasibility and effectiveness outcomes [39].

Reference	Feasibility		Effectiveness
	Recruitment and Retention	Acceptability	Behavioral Determinants	Dietary Behavior
Anderson et al. (1995) [38]	Not reported	Not reported	Nutritional knowledge (particularly practical applications) higher in the intervention group. No significant differences for attitude variables.	No significant differences in micronutrient intakes and energy composition
Ashman et al. (2016) [39]	92% recorded dietary intake on all 3 days	96% thought the combination of a video summary (‘visual’) and a follow-up telephone consultation with a dietitian (‘detailed’, ‘easier to understand’) was helpful	Not reported	77% of participants in the final survey reported changing their diet (foods or food groups, nutrient intakes, or eating behaviors) and some switched to healthier cooking methods
Burr et al. (2007) [40]	190 out of 192 women invited agreed to participate.	Of the 37 participants who still received juice at 32 weeks, all claimed to drink it, although 25 shared it (mostly with children or partners). The main barrier to consumption was change in taste and appetite, followed by the perishability of fruit.	Not reported	A significant increase of fruit juice intake and serum β-carotene, but no increase in consumption of fresh fruits.
Dodd et al. (2018) [41]	Not reported	31% reported using the smartphone app; 50% of users liked the smartphone app (the other 50% provided no response, or answered ‘undecided’) and found the information useful, particularly practical and recipe suggestions, portion size, food groups, and goalsetting opportunities.	Not reported	No significant differences in macronutrient and food group intakes between smartphone and advice vs. advice only.
Evans et al. (2012) [42]	400,000 individuals enrolled in the service between launch and publication of the article, 73% retention rate	Not reported	No differences in attitudes regarding fruit and vegetable consumption, or micronutrient supplementation. Attitudes towards alcohol consumption improved in higher educated participants.	No significant improvements in fruit and vegetable intake.
Hearn et al. (2014) [43]	2378 users signed up to the app over the first year, which is 7% of the target group and 18 % first time mothers in WA. Antenatal web pages were viewed 14,023 times. Usage was highest in the first two trimesters and postpartum.	Website pages with nutrition content were viewed more (40% of views) than the pages on weight, physical activity, sleep, emotions and social life, but self-assessment on sleep and weight were more popular in the app. The average person completed 3.6 self-assessment questionnaires, 15% of women completed the nutrition self-assessment.	Not reported	Not reported
Hillesund et al. (2016) [44]	4245 women attended the clinics during the inclusion period, of 1610 were eligible and 606 were recruited. Attrition was equally distributed among groups.	Not reported	Women in the intervention group reported reading food labels more often, and buying smaller packages of unhealthy foods.	The intervention group had higher overall diet score and favorable dietary behavior in 7 of 10 domains.
Jackson et al. (2011) [45]	Not reported	98% liked the program overall, 98% found it (very) easy to use, and 94% thought it was adequately private, yet 27% thought the program was too long. More participants liked the Educational Worksheet (97%), than the Video Doctor portion (82%).	Nutrition knowledge improved more in the intervention group, and participants more often discussed nutrition with providers.	There were statistically significant increases in intake of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, fish, avocado and nuts, and significant decreases in intake of sugary foods, refined grains, high-fat meats, fried foods, solid fats, and fast food.
Kafatos et al. (1989) [46]	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Energy and protein intakes were significantly closer to recommendations in the intervention group. There were improvements in concentrations of β-carotene and serum vitamin C, but not in hemoglobin, serum iron, and serum vitamin A.
Mauriello et al. (2016) [47]	Good engagement and retention. Nearly 100% of invited women participated, 70–77% of participants were retained at each time point.	Not reported	Significantly more intervention group participants progressed to the action or maintenance Stages of Changes.	There were no significant differences in intakes of fruits and vegetables during pregnancy.
Mauriello et al. (2011) [48]	Recruitment goals were met and exceeded within 3 weeks. All recruited women agreed to participate, 86% completed the session.	90–95% was very satisfied with the program. Participants liked learning new information (n = 35), tailored and personalized feedback (n = 9), and found the program easy to use (n = 6). Some thought there was too much repetition of questions (n = 9) or that the program took too long to complete (n = 6).	Improved assessment of advantages of changing behavior and intentions to change behavior.	Participants reported an average of 1.7 more servings of fruits and vegetables, each day post-intervention.
Moniz et al. (2015) [49]	Not reported	Not reported	Beliefs about nutritious foods and taking daily vitamins improved in 84% and 83% of participants, respectively.	41% of participant reported a higher frequency of nutritious food intake and 32% took vitamins supplements more often.
Piirainen et al. (2016) [50]	Not reported	215 women attended all study visits. The proportion of women who consumed the provided food products for each 12-week period between study visits ranged from 68% to 100%, depending on the product.	Not reported	Significantly higher intakes of vegetables, fruits, soft margarines, and vegetable oils and lower intake of butter. Higher intakes of PUFA, and lower intakes of SFA, as well as higher intakes of vitamin E, folate, and vitamin C.
Rissel et al. (2019) [51]	Severe issues with reach and uptake: 3736 women were screened, 923 found eligible, 322 enrolled, and only 89 completed the final call.	64% of women in the health-coaching arm received all 8 calls, 17% received 5–7 calls and 19% received ≤4 calls.	Not reported	No significant differences in serves of fruit and vegetables, cups of soft drinks, or frequency of take-away meals.
Warren et al., (2017) [52]	Not reported	Participants frequently referred back to their goal card. Authors report acceptability was very high. Women felt it helped to re-assess their eating behavior and think differently about their diet, and it gave them a sense of reassurance.	Not reported	All participants but one reported that the program improved the quality of their diet.
Wilkinson & McIntyre (2012) [53]	Approximately half (48.3%) of the intervention women attended the workshop and overall response rate at time 2 was 67.2%.	Not reported	Not reported	Significantly better adherence to fruit guidelines at time 2. Women who attended the workshop increased their consumption of serves of fruit, vegetables, met fruit guidelines, and had a higher diet quality score.
Wilkinson et al. (2010) [54]	Retention rates were lower in the intervention group (85.9%, 57.7%, and 49.1% at baseline, 12-weeks and 24-weeks post-service entry, respectively) compared to the control group (92.2%, 85.8%, and 75.2%)	Not reported	Not reported	No significant effect on fruit and vegetable intakes.