To those complaining that the results are non-determinative (e.g. “they didn’t disentangle genetics from social issues”) that’s how science works: do some studies, make or evaluate a hypothesis, then you or others iterate on different dimensions, possibly untangling some variables or even refuting the results of such a study. It’s OK to be where it is at this stage.
Of course it’s hard to incorporate that ambiguity into a regular article, especially when you are writing for the university’s publicity office, which is what “MIT News” is.