{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02142857142857143, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007619047619047619, 'mean_word_length': 5.62776025236593, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Review of Understanding Somatization in the Practice of Clinical Neuropsychology

This book is part of the Oxford Workshop Series in association with the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology, and is designed to provide ongoing education to those in the field of clinical neuropsychology. It is a very readable book that provides a solid overview of a major ‘‘elephant in the room’’ in the field of clinical neuropsychology—the role of somatization as a relevant factor in a number of neuropsychological conditions. The timeliness and highly charged nature of what is typically referred to as somatization or somatoform disorders is illustrated by the recent article by Delis and Wetter (2007) along with critiques from Boone (2007), Binder (2007), and Larrabee (2007) regarding the proposed diagnoses of cogniform disorder/condition. Written before the publication of the Delis and Wetter article, Lamberty’s book presents a cogent and compelling description of the cognitive, somatic, and neuropsychological components of somatization. With this treatise on somatization Lamberty provides practicing neuropsychologists with a valuable tool to assist in the evaluation and treatment of their patients. It offers a solid historical/theoretical perspective, is well written and a quick read, and offers many practical suggestions for conceptualizing and treating this poorly defined but difficult patient population. Lamberty identifies a key problem that has limited past research on this topic, namely the fact that the diagnostic criteria of somatization/somatoform disorders are so restrictive and idiosyncratic that few patients actually fit the diagnoses. In clinical practice, physicians and psychologists alike tend to believe they can identify the salient characteristics and diagnose the disorder. However, evidence suggests that clinicians and researchers have a difficult time identifying what distinguishes an individual who is somatizing. Yet, they are adamant that they ‘‘know it when they see it.’’ As Lamberty points out, a major definitional problem emerges from the mind–body