Back

TELF: An End-to-End Temporal Encoder with Late Fusion for Interpretable Disease Risk Prediction from Longitudinal Real-World Data

Liu, Y.; Zhang, Z.

2026-04-06 health informatics
10.64898/2026.04.04.26350180 medRxiv
Show abstract

Deep learning models utilizing longitudinal healthcare data have significantly advanced epidemiological research. However, contemporary transformer-based models increasingly rely on computationally intensive pre-training steps that entail processing massive real-world datasets with cost-prohibitive hardware. We introduce the Temporal Encoder with Late Fusion (TELF), a lightweight end-to-end predictive model featuring an encoder-only architecture for processing medical codes, followed by post-encoder concatenation with demographic variables. TELF learns code embeddings on-the-fly, thereby bypassing the resource-intensive pre-training bottleneck. Furthermore, its late-fusion design preserves the integrity of the temporal attention mechanism before integrating static demographic predictors. We evaluated TELF using an administrative claims database across three distinct cohorts: pancreatic cancer (n=53,661), type 2 diabetes (n=78,756), and heart failure (n=72,540). TELF consistently outperformed traditional machine learning baselines, including XGBoost, LightGBM, and logistic regression. Specifically, TELF achieved AUCs of 0.9150, 0.8199, and 0.8721 for pancreatic cancer, type 2 diabetes, and heart failure, respectively, compared with 0.9044, 0.7908, and 0.8535 for XGBoost and 0.9014, 0.7800, and 0.8466 for logistic regression. Beyond predictive superiority, TELF's isolated temporal attention mechanism enables population-level motif mining. By extracting high-attention temporal sequences, we mapped aggregated patient journey pathways, revealing interpretable clinical trajectories preceding disease onset. Collectively, these results demonstrate that TELF provides a resource-efficient and accessible framework for advanced temporal modeling in clinical and epidemiological research.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.0%
2
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.3%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.0%
4
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.7%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 42%
3.0%
7
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
8
Med
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
9
Nature Computational Science
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
10
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.3%
11
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
12
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
14
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
15
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
16
Nature Methods
336 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
17
PNAS Nexus
147 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
19
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
20
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.7%
23
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 70%
0.7%