Burnout Self-Assessment
Copenhagen Burnout Inventory
Measure your burnout across three dimensions: personal exhaustion, work-related fatigue, and client-related strain. Based on the open-access CBI developed by Kristensen et al.
Before you begin
This inventory uses the original 19 items from the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (Kristensen et al., 2005). It measures how physically and emotionally exhausted you feel in three areas of your life.
- Personal burnout — general exhaustion in daily life
- Work-related burnout — exhaustion tied to your job
- Client-related burnout — exhaustion from working with people (patients, students, customers)
Answer based on how you have felt recently. There are no right or wrong answers. If you don't work with clients, answer those questions based on the people you interact with most at work, or select "Never / almost never."
Question 1 of 19
Your Overall Burnout Score
--
--
out of 100
Personal
--
--
Work
--
--
Client
--
--
Score Comparison
What your scores mean
What you can do
This is not a diagnosis. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory measures self-reported exhaustion. It does not diagnose clinical conditions. If your scores concern you, or if you are experiencing persistent distress, talk to a healthcare professional.
How does this compare to the Maslach Burnout Inventory?
The CBI focuses specifically on the exhaustion dimension of burnout, scored on a 0-100 scale. The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) measures three separate dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. The two tools are complementary. CBI scores tend to be numerically higher because of the 0-100 scale and its focus on exhaustion. If you want a broader picture, try both.
The Research Behind the CBI
The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was developed during the PUMA project in Denmark and has been validated across cultures worldwide. Here is what the research tells us.
From the Research
"The CBI consists of three scales measuring personal burnout, work-related burnout, and client-related burnout, for use in different domains."
— Kristensen, T.S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K.B. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3), 192-207.
Kristensen and colleagues created the CBI because they wanted a burnout measure that was free from the conceptual limitations of existing tools. They focused purely on exhaustion, the core component that most researchers agree defines burnout, rather than mixing in related concepts like cynicism or job satisfaction.
The CBI was developed and tested on nearly 1,900 workers in the Danish PUMA study (Project on Burnout, Motivation, and Job Satisfaction), covering human service professions like social work, healthcare, and education.
Personal burnout sits at the foundation. The authors noted that it is difficult to score high on work or client burnout without also scoring high on personal burnout. The subscales are related but distinct: different workplace factors predict each one differently (Borritz et al., 2006), which is why the CBI reports them separately.
Cross-Cultural Validation
"From a scientific perspective, the CBI is free in the public domain and is open access, unlike the MBI."
— Alahmari, M.A., et al. (2022). Prevalence of Burnout in Healthcare Specialties: A Systematic Review. Med. Sci. Monitor, 28, e938798.
The CBI has been validated in studies across Denmark, New Zealand, Japan, China, Spain, Iran, Nigeria, Italy, and Ireland. These studies consistently report high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha around 0.85-0.90) and confirm the three-factor structure holds across different cultures and professions.
The scale correlates strongly with other burnout measures. For example, CBI exhaustion scores show an r of approximately 0.8 with the MBI Emotional Exhaustion subscale, supporting that it measures the same core construct.
Reliability Across Subscales
- Personal: α = 0.87
- Work: α = 0.87
- Client: α = 0.85
Based on ~1,900 participants in the original PUMA study (Kristensen et al., 2005). Later studies report similar or higher values, with one study of doctors reporting overall CBI α = 0.91.
Each of the 19 questions uses a 5-point scale. Responses are scored from 0 to 100 in increments of 25:
| Response | Score |
|---|---|
| Never / almost never | 0 |
| Seldom | 25 |
| Sometimes | 50 |
| Often | 75 |
| Always | 100 |
One item ("Do you have enough energy for family and friends during leisure time?") is reverse-scored because having energy means lower burnout. Each subscale score is the average of its items, giving a value between 0 and 100. The overall score is the average of all 19 items.
Score categories follow the thresholds commonly used in research (Creedy et al., 2017; Bernard et al., 2023): below 50 is low, 50-74 is moderate, 75-99 is high, and 100 is severe.
Burnout Prevalence in the Original Study
In the PUMA study, Kristensen et al. measured burnout across ~1,900 human service workers. Here is the proportion who scored 50 or above on each subscale.
Percentage of participants scoring ≥ 50. Data from Kristensen et al., 2005. Personal burnout was the most common form. The average personal burnout score was approximately 36.
About This Assessment
This page uses the original Copenhagen Burnout Inventory items and scoring methodology as published in Kristensen et al. (2005). The CBI is a public domain instrument, free for non-commercial use.
This is an educational self-reflection tool. It shows how you score on the CBI based on your own responses. It is not a diagnostic instrument and does not replace professional evaluation. Burnout is recognized by the WHO as an occupational phenomenon (ICD-11), not a medical condition. A high score means you report significant exhaustion, but it does not mean you have a clinical disorder. If you are struggling, talk to a healthcare provider.
Scoring follows the exact method described in the original paper: responses are converted to 0-100 values, one item is reverse-scored, and subscale scores are computed as averages. The score bands (low < 50, moderate 50-74, high 75-99, severe 100) are based on thresholds used across multiple studies including Creedy et al. (2017) and Bernard et al. (2023). The original authors did not provide official diagnostic cut-offs; these bands are interpretive guidelines used in research.
If you are feeling extremely overwhelmed or having thoughts of self-harm, please reach out for help. In the US, contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by calling or texting 988. In the UK, contact Samaritans at 116 123. This assessment is not a substitute for professional support.