Pacing as an intervention appears with great regularity in the chronic pain management literature and yet what service providers actually mean by pacing is unclear and poorly defined. This short communication reports the findings of a structured review of the literature which examined the strength of the evidence for pacing as an intervention for people with chronic pain. The McMaster critical review guidelines were followed and the relevant electronic databases were searched. Findings revealed a paucity of outcome studies specific to pacing as an intervention. Although background literature demonstrates that pacing is often one part of a multidisciplinary intervention program, the research conducted on these programs presents pacing itself as an ill- or undefined construct. It is evident from this review that "pacing," while a widely employed term, lacks consensus of definition and a demonstrable evidence-base.