You don't need loads of research to show it is safer to sit in a seat facing the rear. Is it better to have your whole bodyweight thrown against a seat and seatback rather than across one lap belt? Not a question that needs 12 engineers. The RAF did it post-war on the strength of their wartime experiences and there is no statistical evidence because there have not been any RAF personnel transports of this type to have crashed since 1945.
As for the flying projectiles, true. You couldn't have a significant number of rear-facing seats without doing something about the bins. Mind you, a few pax were killed at Kegworth by objects flying out of the bins and striking them in the back of the head (not a single one remained attached). Bins in general are unsatisfactory. They are not tested dynamically, and with RF seats you would have to find somewhere else to put the wheelie bag.
Anyway, as the article makes clear, this has been done solely to get more sardines into the can. Why don't they try out the slave-ship configuration?