As often happens, a reporter has taken scientific articles and stretched them further than they really go.
The problem is, the term 'atypical' of antipsychotics doesn't really identify a specific group of similar compounds. It was first used of clozapine, simply because it didn't fit into the chemical groups of the earlier phenothiazine antipsychotics and slightly later butyrophenone antipsychotics. These older drugs can greatly help people with psychosis, but the serious movement disorder side-effects make them unusable at a really effective dose level for about 50% of patients (not one in five). Clozapine acts at the D4 dopamine receptor rather than D2, and the risk of movement disorder side-effects is very low. Unfortunately for 1-2% of patients a different side-effect, very low white blood cell count, occurs.
More recent antipsychotics than clozapine - such as quetiapine (Seroquel) and aripiprazole (Abilify) - are also neither phenothiazines nor butyrophenones, and so have also been called 'atypical' antipsychotics; but they are not chemically similar to clozapine, and they do have some significant D2 activity. It would not be so surprising if some of these drugs turned out to be little better than the old ones. However it is not possible to extrapolate from one 'atypical' antipsychotic to others, because they are not chemically similar. I think it is notable that neither of the studies looked at clozapine at all, which I think may still be the best choice for most people.