qualitative description of their quantitive findings (less than, little...) in the abstract are consistant with Jorgensen including the advantage of positive wrist torque after negative torque had held the angle (assuming in fact it was possible to do this consistently). IMHO the values that Jorgensen found for the advantage of a resistive wirst torque was (relatively) small and so for me would fit in their qualitative description.
The only swing modification measured in Jorgensen that struck me a being large enough to make it worth an effort was the advantage of a bent lead arm and a '3 segment' swing. Not something I pursued because holding the angle gave me all the distance I needed.
The lack of a match against experience may be due to the lack of consideration to the non-speed effects on distance from holding the angle. I don't think much of my 15 yard increase in distance with irons is attributable to increased club head speed from holding the angle but rather from correct effective loft at impact. This is beyond the non-quantified (at least from a simulation) increase in consistency of contact from holding the angle.
All of this of course leaves to the reader the task of understanding the implications in a real golf swing of the torques implied. As I've noted, actively preventing the extension of the trail arm when the trail hand is below the trail shoulder is required even to produce a zero wrist torque leaving one more example of active muscle use that does not lead to application of a torque to accelerate the clubhead