The advantage of this study is that the villages were randomized so it's unlikely that the control group engaged in more risky behavior than the treatment group

The advantage of this study is that the villages were randomized so it's unlikely that the control group engaged in more risky behavior than the treatment group. This result for 50+ was right on the edge of the significance interval so proves is probably too strong of a word. It means you would expect this result to happen by chance if the experiment were repeated 20 times. It is definitely evidence for some efficacy but it is about as weak as it gets to be considered evidence from a scientific POV. My point was just that the headlines painted a significantly different picture than was contained within the paper itself.